When the Antarctic ozone hole was discovered by British Antarctic Survey scientists in 1985, the world was quick to respond.
Since stratospheric ozone is vital to filtering out harmful UV radiation, a fear of cancer drove policy makers to almost immediately impose a ban on chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the causative agent of ozone destruction. Within a year of the ozone hole discovery, the Montreal Protocol was established calling for a 50% reduction in CFCs by 1999. Recognizing the inadequacy of this timeline, the protocol was strengthened in 1990 to phase out CFCs entirely by the year 2000. Recognizing again the inadequacy of even this, the protocol was strengthened in 1992 to phase out CFCs by 1996.
The timeline from discovery of the ozone hole to a complete ban on CFCs took 11 years. Eleven years, and CFCs were gone. It was a rare success as responsible policy makers listened to scientists and correctly accepted their dire warnings. Seems it wasn’t so long ago that the public genuinely trusted scientists.
We are now embroiled in the climate crisis, which is every bit as serious – if not more so – as the Antarctic ozone hole crisis. Unfortunately, the consequences of climate change – loss of ecosystem balance, crop loss, sea level rise and mass migration, new disease emergence, heat stress and death, and more – all occur in slow motion, taking place over years and decades. As such, policy makers were and remain slow to respond as awareness of the climate crisis slowly percolated into the American consciousness. Attempts at progress encountered a blizzard of science denial, albeit mostly from a certain political sector of the American electorate (guess which).
I used to joke that if climate change had immediate dire consequences with people fearing for their lives, we’d have a solution by now. Of course, the COVID-19 crisis dealt a sobering blow to that rather naive hypothesis. The disease has seared its way through the population with people dying by the thousands every day in real time and still there is rampant science-denial, again primarily from those on the right of the political spectrum. (A Pew Research Center poll of major Western countries found that, for those who trust science “a lot” the disparity between the left (62%) and the right (20%) was greatest in the USA.)
People called the disease a hoax, and still do. People still refuse to mask up. One South Dakota ER nurse reported that some of her COVID-19 patients often “don’t want to believe that COVID is real. Their last dying words are, ‘This can’t be happening. It’s not real.’ Instead of FaceTiming their families, they’re filled with anger and hatred.” Conservative thinking seems to have receded to the point where “owning the libs,” whether its COVID or climate change, has taken priority over self-preservation.
Scientists, not the virus, became the enemy. Nevertheless, while confronted with political opposition and personal threats, scientists worked tirelessly to make progress toward understanding the virus and developing a vaccine.
Molecular-biology-speak has now entered the language. Phrases such as “genome sequencing,” “viral protein spike,” and “mutant variants” are cited in the press. These terms are bandied about without any thought to the scientific triumphs that lead to their discoveries. We take for granted the astonishing brute ingenuity and deduction required to have uncovered, over decades, such nuanced and detailed cellular function. Working without the benefit of direct observation, scientists now understand cellular mechanisms occurring at the molecular level. We reap the benefit of this knowledge every day with our medical cures. The human mind did this.
Yes, regarding this long annus horribilis, science is our exit strategy. Perhaps the public will now gain a new appreciation for the robustness of science and will hopefully apply that same trust to climate science, since the degree of understanding regarding climate change is as robust as anything the molecular biologists are doing. This should be a clue that the climate scientists know what they’re doing.
But that is for another day. At the outset of the pandemic there was considerable chatter concerning the apparent collision of priorities pitting scientifically-based guidance against anxiety for the economy. Over time a sort-of equilibrium was established allowing for the continuation of commerce in the face of a contagious disease.
Now that the vaccines have arrived, everyone has to chip in. However, one of several polls showed that 42% of Republicans will refuse the vaccine compared to only 17% of Democrats. This is not helpful to economic recovery. It’s funny how those that whined most about giving priority to COVID safety precautions over the economy are those least willing to help out by getting a vaccine.
Let’s now appreciate that science has ultimately come to the rescue of our economy.