DYSPEPSIA GENERATION

We have seen the future, and it sucks.

‘Guns Are a Public Health Issue’ Is Not an Argument

16th June 2016

Jason Richwine speaks truth to sleaze.

Do you have a political opinion that you wish would get more traction? Here’s some cynical advice: Call it a “public-health issue.” It’s the quickest way to seize the mantle of Science, which these days is the ultimate moral high ground. Remember, you’re not a political activist — you’re just a scientifically informed citizen with a concern about public health.

Yeah, right.

The American Medical Association (AMA) upped the ante on Tuesday by formally declaring gun violence a “public-health crisis” [my emphasis] and reiterating its support for various gun control measures. Unfortunately for the AMA, affixing the “public health” label on an issue adds no value to the debate. Most political issues have some relationship to people’s health, but that doesn’t mean that Science automatically comes down on one side or another. The AMA’s declaration is another exercise in science-gilding, which is the covering of one’s political beliefs with the veneer of scientific objectivity.

I looked for their calls for further research into cars, airplanes, and motorcycles, not to mention alligators in Florida, but (oddly enough) didn’t find any.

Supporting waiting periods and background checks, as the AMA does, is not a “medical” position. It’s a political one, and it remains a political position even when an organization with a fancy professional name adopts it.

I’ll say it: More junk science from the modern clerisy

If the AMA politicizes guns, on what issues can it be trusted at all?

Hint: Damned few; and only those that (surprise!) deal with actual medical matters.

Comments are closed.