What the Public Should Know about Science

The public knowledge that the public should know is not known to the public about the role of science in everyday life. If the masses do not understand the positive contributions made through scientific discoveries, they will be less supportive when requesting funds. As their research may not be realized until several years, many of the scientific discoveries scientists made today may seem like a waste of time and money. In order for ordinary citizens to accept science as a positive contributor, we must teach science to advance and understand the processes necessary to achieve it.

One idea emphasizes that all scientists must outreach and teach science. disagree. If scientists are enthusiastic about attracting the public and are generally called "scientific communication" (scientific communication), they should be exposed only to "general people". I think that an enthusiastic scientist will talk with non scientists in a few minutes a week, recruit new curiosity, build confidence between scientists and non-scientists, and in the "after the truth" Fight against behavior patterns 21st century

The public knowledge that the public should know is not known to the public about the role of science in everyday life. If the masses do not understand the positive contributions made through scientific discoveries, they will be less supportive when requesting funds. As their research may not be realized until several years, many of the scientific discoveries scientists made today may seem like a waste of time and money. - Immunization is designed to help people survive their daily lives. Eddie Jenner, a rural doctor who lived in Berkeley, England, began vaccination in 1796 (Department of Health). Throughout history, vaccination is getting better for safer people. To maintain good health, everyone should receive immunization against certain diseases. Vaccines have been shown to immunize people into heavy sickness (child immunity)

As we all know, anti-vaccination campaigns are increasingly proof that bad public health requirements can have practical consequences. The way to control the occurrence of good diseases can threaten children who have never been vaccinated, children who have never been vaccinated, and children who are susceptible to cancer treatment or other immunodeficiency diseases . Some of the problems arise from the brutal work of Andrew Wakefield of Lancet magazine. Wakefield's paper took too long, but scientific publishers have mechanisms to eliminate and avoid poorly written or unethical literature. Some discontinuities are based on other problems - experimental procedures or reagents or reproducibility errors. In either case, responsible publishers and researchers will try to record directly. Another strategy is to "express attention" to mark doubtful and controversial claims