“Follow the Science” in COVID-19 Policy: A Scoping Review

• Published in: HEC forum 2024-12, Vol.36 (4), p.571-589
• Main Author: Greenmyer, Jacob R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: COVID-19; Education; Ethics; Health Policy; Humans; Medical Law; Philosophy; Philosophy of Medicine; Policy Making; SARS-CoV-2; Theory of Medicine/Bioethics
• ISSN: 0956-2737; 1572-8498; 1572-8498
• DOI: 10.1007/s10730-024-09521-w

“Follow the science” was commonly repeated during debates on COVID-19-related policy. The phrase “follow the science” raises questions that are central to our theories of knowledge and the application of scientific knowledge to maximize the wellbeing of our society. The purpose of this study was to (1) perform a scoping review of literature discussing “follow the science” and COVID-19, and (2) consider “follow the science” in the context of pediatric health. A comprehensive search of 14 databases was performed on May 23, 2023. Articles were included if they used terms such as “follow the science”, “follow the scientists”, “listen to science” or “listen to scientists”, and discussed COVID-19. There were 24 articles included in the final review. Existing literature on “follow the science” (1) differentiates between scientific knowledge and policy decisions; (2) emphasizes the importance of social sciences in policy making; (3) calls for more transparency in the knowledge synthesis and policy generating process; and (4) finds that scientific advisors see their role as advising on science rather than policy decision making. There was no definitional, epistemological, or philosophical intellectual defense of “follow the science” in the peer reviewed literature. Policy requires (1) reliable data and (2) agreement on what to do considering those empirical facts by appealing to values, ethics, morality, and law. A review of school shutdowns is used as an example of the inadequacy of “follow the science” as a guiding principle for public policy.