Samuel Silverstein, president of the Federation of Applied Science and Experimental Biology, says that a lot of the communication errors are only natural because the various parties, as well as the information, are imperfect. Even federal agencies have limitations. Silverstein compares communication of conclusions based on scientific information to a trip to the doctor. When you go to a doctor, the doctor makes decisions on the basis of imperfect information. If they calculate positions, there are a host of factors that range from science to the read on the constituency.
Science is just one component.
The financial issues are there, too, but again they are just one issue of several. For example, a single medical advance may be promoted by the journal it's published in, several funding agencies, the university's medical school, and sometimes voluntary organizations affiliated in some way with the findings, Thomas says. For parties involved in communicating science, getting across the conditional nature of discovery is a major challenge. Inherent in science is mutability. It changes as science grows.