[awak3ning]

I believe that the author of this paper paints a simplified view of the world, and the examples they draw on do not imply the conclusion they are proposing.

For example, in the case of big tobacco, the stance that "smoking is safe" may have more similarities to the "Covid-19 is an existential threat and we must do everything possible to minimize death". Why do I claim this? Well, both positions rely on dogma in the guise of science, both positions are the commonly accepted cannon of the time, and both positions are propped up by bureaucrats masquerading and scientists to further their own self interest.

I would advise readers to not see the world in such a black and white fashion. We should actively be discussing the scientific literature, disseminating facts and figures, and discussing how to prevent public health risk without infringing upon individual freedoms and causing economic (economic factors have a downstream health and human cost too, particularly those in lower socioeconomic strata) damage.

So in summary, science is not dogma. Science is a toolkit we use to investigate the natural world. Caricaturing those holding different worldviews as "science deniers" is not constructive to public discourse.

Be compassionate in your world-view, open-minded to new evidence, pragmatic about solutions, but do not yield your faculties for rational thought and skepticism to the "expert class".

[da_big_ghey]

Rothbard wrote an interesting piece on the dangers of "scientism", as he called it. It might provide some interesting perspective on this issue for those who are curious: https://cdn.mises.org/mantle%20of%20science.pdf