c-j-fisher.bsky.social
Ph.D. Chemical Biologist & Scientific Communicator 🧬
Digging on Science in Society 🥼
Consumer of Science Facts & Science Fiction 📚
223 posts
173 followers
385 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
P.S. This silver and very fake bullet was made by North Western Mint as a novelty. So, to all my secret werewolf friends, I promise you are safe!
(6/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
While it's great to tinker, be sure it's experimental.
Set a hypothesis for effects and plan metrics to track efficacy.
Using data to keep yourself honest is a surefire way to improve and iterate.
That way, even though not everything you do will be a hit, it will always be valuable.
(5/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
If you've done your job right, there's always an evolving conversation with your audience.
As you learn more, you adjust messages and reenter the discussion.
And yes, that also means you have to listen, A LOT. Otherwise, you're just shouting into the void.
Fun? Perhaps. Effective? No.
(4/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
It's tempting to think of awesome thought leadership pieces, content, and campaigns as self-sustaining.
However, they will only have the intended effect IF you build a foundation for them to flourish ahead of time and continue tending to them over time.
(3/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Like the scientific endeavor itself, effective communication activities require a consistent presence and an ever-learning approach.
If you want your thoughts, science, or offerings to take hold, you must keep showing up!
(2/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
I fully agree that the whole spectrum is ultimately needed, especially for HCPs. (Don't get me started on p-values, haha!)
When I suggested starting with a quartile-level understanding, I meant it as a starting point with the public for broaching a deeper appreciation for uncertainty.
comment in response to
post
I'll definitely check out your article! I always appreciate folks trying to clarify actionable meaning from statistics!
comment in response to
post
Awesome comment! Thinking in terms of 0/50/100% is better than a binary scale, but it is still too reductive.
Though harder to articulate, the rubber hits the road in the margins BETWEEN these probabilities.
At a minimum, we need folks to track 0/25/50/75/100% and develop the spectrum from there.
comment in response to
post
But that is just my two cents! What do you think?
What are your tactics, tips, and analogies for discussing uncertainty? I also welcome any relevant anecdotes.
After all, we are living in uncertain times!
🧪 (7/7)
comment in response to
post
My top tip is to describe uncertainty in relative terms and its origin. Don't be afraid to use numbers!
If your audience doesn't know what to make of the uncertainty, help them contextualize it with your thoughts.
🧪 (6/7)
royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/...
comment in response to
post
Still, there's utility and ethical responsibility in expressing uncertainty.
Though initial conversations of uncertainty can have mixed results, they can still protect against losses of trust when evidence changes. That happens a lot!
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
🧪 (5/7)
comment in response to
post
Uncertainty is a dynamic, sliding scale.
That makes precise and concise discussions of uncertainty challenging. Complicating things, Studies have shown that initial communications of uncertainty sometimes negatively affect trust, and people respond to uncertainty in different ways.
🧪 (4/7)
comment in response to
post
For many without scientific experience, putting uncertainty into context is harder. Leaving them wondering...
"Just how uncertain is this result?"
"Does the uncertainty change how we might respond?"
"If we are uncertain, is there a chance we respond in a harmful way unintentionally?"
🧪 (3/7)
comment in response to
post
As scientific thinkers, we benefit from years of wading into ongoing research, unanswered questions, and the uncertainty that comes with that.
That helps us evaluate relative confidence to comprehend just how uncertain a conclusion is. Plus, we are used to new evidence altering our views.
🧪 (2/7)
comment in response to
post
Haha no worries. I don’t think you can edit a post on Bluesky, but i could be wrong.
comment in response to
post
It’s a bizarre double standard to say the least!
comment in response to
post
Ah man, sorry about that. You can also watch the full episodes on HBO, if you have access to that.
comment in response to
post
I’m always happy to have more funding sources. And, I do like the idea of the scientific community relying on itself to generate some of them.
In addition, I want us to work to show folks the value science produces to change that proportional viewpoint. Science has fantastic ROI, after all!
comment in response to
post
Without a doubt US science needs to develop creative alternative funding models to insulate from disruptions like these.
Certainty, industry & non-profit investment increases can help as well.
Still, I firmly believe government funding is essential to the equation. Science is a public good!
comment in response to
post
For the record, RJK Jr. is already a historically disastrous Secretary of HHS.
Among many terrible decisions, appointing David Geier to "study" the thoroughly investigated & HIGHLY debunked autism/vaccines link is actually a sign of sickness at HHS itself.
(2/2) 🧪
www.statnews.com/2025/03/26/r...
comment in response to
post
I strongly encourage you to give it a read.
I bet it will make you feel less lonely and help you turn that frustration into action.
cen.acs.org/policy/Scien...
(8/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Plus, you'll recognize a familiar name...me!
I was really fortunate to be included in the piece, alongside commentary from a slate of brilliant scientists working to turn things around.
(7/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Collectively, the commenters discuss how we need to:
👑 Grow leadership in science advocacy
🌊 Sustain momentum in both bad and good times
🔗 Coordinate efforts and strengthen internal ties
📣 Improve public #SciComm and engage society
(6/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
To help get you thinking, check out this awesome recent article from @kvasquez.bsky.social in @cenmag.bsky.social . It describes how scientific organizations, academics, and advocates are recognizing deficiencies and organizing to address them.
(5/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Perhaps if we had taken up a bigger mantle in civic society in the preceding years, it would have been easier to rally support and push back today.
But, as the saying goes, "The best time to start was yesterday. The next best time is now."
(4/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
There's certainly a lot of interlacing issues at play that led to this moment, some within our control and some that are not.
Still, it seems to me that a lack of sustained dialogue between the scientific community and external stakeholders is at the heart of our current woes.
(3/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
It's frustrating to see our scientific infrastructure and R&D ecosystem suddenly come under fire despite its many successes and benefits.
But, those two questions are exactly the right response. The first helps us identify what needs addressing, and the second is your sign to plug in.
(2/8) 🧪
comment in response to
post
If you're feeling even more festive or just want to learn more, check out ASCLS for activities and resources intended to help celebrate MLPW.
ascls.org/lab-week-mlpw
(5/5) 🧪
comment in response to
post
For a moment, think about your last clinical test or one that's upcoming.
While the result is most important, remember that you trust it because of the diligent work of clinical lab professionals and the diagnostic technologies they wield.
#LabWeek #Lab4Life
(4/5) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Now in its 50th year, MLPW is organized by 18 national organizations to build awareness for #ClinicalLaboratory professionals.
From managing samples to creating LDTs and using commercial diagnostics, we depend on them to help us get answers to what ails us.
That's pretty darn important!
(3/5) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Since it is Medical Laboratory Professionals Week (MLPW), let's change that!
Take a minute to consider how clinical lab professionals generate molecular data and turn it into actionable insights that support your well-being.
(2/5) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Great piece, Krystal! Thanks for chatting and including me.
comment in response to
post
100%. Well said.
Our community hasn’t had to really mobilize and defend our work like this in US. That’s left us a little complacent. But, I think people are realizing the need for engagement and some are stepping into leading roles.
It will take time, but I’m confident we can respond.
comment in response to
post
So what now?
1. Don't get sucked into doomerism. It's not over until we give up.
2. Protect your mental health & steel yourself for the road ahead.
3. Support each other, especially those who lost jobs.
4. Use your voice & expertise. Advocacy starts with one person.
For help, DM me.
(6/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
For more information on the totality of the layoffs and their effects, STAT news wrote this excellent overview.
It's a hard read, but an important one for scientific and medical communities, as well the public.
www.statnews.com/2025/04/01/h...
(5/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
RFK Jr. promised "radical transparency," yet most of the #FOIA team was fired.
With limited media teams, how can journalists ask questions and hold people accountable?
HHS has eliminated public comments and increased its control over external comms, historically led by agency scientists.
(4/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Focusing on the comms, media, & FOIA teams, it is impossible to keep Americans healthy without keeping them informed. #PublicHealth depends on consistent, transparent communications.
For more, read this post by Erica Johnson, a former FDA comms official.
www.linkedin.com/posts/activi...
(3/6) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Let's not mince words; this is a massive mistake and a malignant decision.
First, investments in human health should not be targeted for cuts. But if this were really about "budget concerns," why eliminate FDA positions almost entirely funded by user fees?
(2/6) 🧪
www.statnews.com/2025/04/01/f...
comment in response to
post
It's so frustrating when political operators and lawyers act like they are qualified to define what is a scientific fact.
Often, it is paired with dichotomous thinking and statements that massively oversimplify complex concepts with many intricate details.
comment in response to
post
Otherwise, I love talking with people about their passion for science in society. So, reach out if you want to chat about science advocacy.
See you out there!
(10/10) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Finally, if you want to organize with others or find more resources, browse your favorite scientific organizations.
My top org recommendations are @aaas.org, @ucsusa.bsky.social, @acs.org (or your favorite professional society), and University Public/Government Affairs Offices.
(9/10) 🧪
comment in response to
post
Beyond that, STAC has several awesome resources that can help you back up your voice with clear, tangible evidence points.
sciencetechaction.org
(8/10) 🧪