We look at scientific evidence with cold, hard objectivity, putting our own biases to one side.

我們用冷硬的客觀態度看待科學證據，把自己的偏見放在一邊。

But this idea has been debated for many years.

但這個想法已經爭論了很多年。

Scientists spent huge amounts of time considering the question of subjectivity when interpreting evidence.

科學家在解釋證據時，花了大量時間考慮主觀性問題。

In normal times, it's a cornerstone of how science is appraised.

平時，它是科學評價的基石。

But in these abnormal times it's that same questioning still happening.

但在這個不正常的時代，就是這樣的質疑依然在發生。

So how healthy is our scientific debate been?

那麼，我們的科學辯論到底有多健康呢？

Has acknowledged what we just don't know.

已經承認了我們只是不知道的事情。

And has it given full weight not just to covert, but to the consequences of co vid.

它是否已充分重視不僅是祕密的，而且是共同的後果。

Throughout the pandemic, I have spoken to coalitions, academics and public health doctors who cannot speak because their employers won't allow it.

在整個大流行期間，我曾與聯盟、學者和公共衛生醫生交談過，他們不能說話，因為他們的僱主不允許。

I've spoken to others who have been disciplined for speaking publicly on.

我曾與其他因公開發言而受到處分的人談過。

Yet there are others who have genuine expertise but are reluctant to share their thoughts because they're too scared.

然而，還有一些人真正擁有專業知識，卻因為太害怕而不願意分享自己的想法。

The majority of us are conducting 40 to 60 consultations every day.

我們大多數人每天都要進行40到60次諮詢。

This is Professor Claire Gerada, former elected leader of the country's GPS, felt hot.

這就是我國GPS前當選領導人克萊爾-傑拉達教授，感覺很熱。

I took my temperature and it was about 101 102.

我量了一下體溫，大概是101 102。

Talking about her own experience of co vid back in March.

談到自己3月份時的合拍經歷。

She waas happy to publicly discuss aspects of covert then, but is now very reluctant, she say's because the debate has become far too toxic.

她當時很樂意公開討論隱蔽性的問題，但現在很不願意，她說是因為辯論已經變得太毒了。

It's very difficult to discuss Cove it.

這是很難討論的科夫它。

I mean, clearly everybody's discussing Kobe, but it's difficult to discuss the nuances of the approach to Kobe.

我的意思是，很明顯，每個人都在討論科比，但很難討論對科比的方法的細微差別。

What you actually have to do is to discuss debate, look at options, weigh up the evidence on then for our politicians to come to the right decision for the right, for the right number of people.

你實際上要做的是討論辯論，研究各種方案，權衡證據，然後讓我們的政治家做出正確的決定，為正確的人，為正確的人數。

But even saying that one gets accused of wanting to kill people off, not wanting to save lives, which is nonsense, Doctor Sunil Bhopal is a pediatrician.

但即便是說，也會被指責為想殺人滅口，不想救人，這是無稽之談，蘇尼爾-博帕爾醫生是一名兒科醫生。

So I started in March 2020 thinking Okay, we're going into this really severe period where we need to throw everything we have.

所以我從2020年3月開始就在想，好吧，我們要進入這個非常嚴峻的時期，我們需要把我們所有的東西都扔掉。

It covered 19, which would needed to be done.

它涵蓋了19個，這將需要做。

It was absolutely right thing to do at the time.

這在當時是絕對正確的做法。

But when Dr Bhopal argued back in April that Children were at very low risk from covert itself but risked significant harm from co vered restrictions, he faced a furious backlash from some accusations have been thrown at me online, which don't know how much attention I need to pay to them, but my number one priority throughout has Bean about health and well being.

但當博帕爾博士在4月份辯稱，兒童從隱蔽本身的風險很低，但從co vered限制中受到重大傷害的風險時，他面臨著憤怒的反擊，從一些指責已經在網上扔給我，這不知道我需要對他們給予多大的關注，但我的首要任務整個有豆關於健康和福祉。

The debate around, locked down and shielding has been high profile and toxic, but it goes well beyond that.

圍繞著，鎖定和屏蔽的爭論一直很高調，很毒辣，但遠遠不止於此。

There's been significant disagreements about issues such as how the virus passes between us, how many of us are immune, the wisdom of mass testing, how well masks work, whether we can eliminate the virus.

關於病毒如何在我們之間傳遞、我們有多少人有免疫力、大規模測試的智慧、口罩的效果如何、我們是否能消除病毒等問題，一直存在重大分歧。

On that question about the closure of schools to stop the spread.

關於那個關停學校以阻止蔓延的問題。

Professor Sam Everington has been a GP in the deprived Bromley by Bow Area of East London for over 30 years.

薩姆-埃弗林頓教授在東倫敦貧困的Bromley by Bow地區擔任全科醫生超過30年。

I think polarization is partly because nobody knows exact answer.

我認為兩極分化的部分原因是沒有人知道確切的答案。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思嗎？

And it's really important to say that way need to be able to say in In science, you know where you are now.

而且真的很重要，說這種方式需要在科學中說，你知道你現在在哪裡。

You know what the evidence is now, but we learn and you need Thio.

你知道現在的證據是什麼，但我們學習，你需要Thio。

You need to change.

你需要改變。

Your approach is you go through so there's always a level of uncertainty, and some people think that we have the answers to people's disease and one of the important things I say to the patient quite often.

你的方法是你通過，所以總是有一個不確定的程度，有些人認為我們有答案的人的疾病，我經常對病人說的一個重要的事情。

This eyes, I don't know.

這眼睛，我不知道。

Some commentators argue that the debate has been dominated by those who have allowed least room for uncertainty.

一些評論員認為，辯論的主導者是那些不確定因素最少的人。

A footnote in a recent medical journal editorial provoked quite a storm in academic circles recently.

最近，一篇醫學雜誌社論的腳註在學術界引發了不小的風波。

Why?

為什麼？

Because on the question of conflicts of interest, it said, the authors declare that all three authors have been wrong about co vid 19 in an article about how little we really know about co vid.

因為在利益衝突的問題上，它說，作者聲明，三位作者在一篇關於我們對co vid的瞭解到底有多少的文章中對co vid 19的看法都是錯誤的。

Their point was very deliberate.

他們的觀點是非常慎重的。

Professor George Davey Smith was one of the authors during the pandemic.

喬治-戴維-史密斯教授是大流行期間的作者之一。

I think the acknowledgement of uncertainty in communication of what is essentially scientific evidence, scientific knowledge has been inadequate.

我認為，在交流本質上是科學證據、科學知識的過程中，對不確定性的承認是不夠的。

There's some commentators who say have been saying exactly the same thing right from the beginning, carrying on, saying that now, whatever side of the debate they're on, they're not the people that I would be able to listen to to get useful evidence.

有一些評論員說從一開始就一直在說一模一樣的話，進行著，說現在，不管他們是站在哪一邊的辯論，他們都不是我能夠聽從的人，以獲得有用的證據。

But if the evidence is so uncertain, then why do many commentators seem so certain?

但如果證據如此不確定，那麼為什麼許多評論家看起來如此肯定？

Remember, scientists are always human on, they will still, I do think take a position that will not just depend on the evidence they have in the paper.

請記住，科學家總是人上，他們還是會，我認為會採取一種立場，而不僅僅取決於他們在論文中的證據。

They've just written off the other.

他們只是把另一個人寫下來了。

Their values will come into it well.

他們的價值觀會很好地融入其中。

And we can see that through other obvious that that's coming to the fore, not just the data.

而且我們可以通過其他明顯的，正在凸顯出來的，而不僅僅是數據。

Perhaps it was no surprise that something as enormous as co vid was communicated to people in broad strokes has normal scientific nuance been lost on the problem with the way that we've communicated this partly because it's politicizes.

也許這並不奇怪，像co vid這樣巨大的東西被傳達給人們在寬泛的筆觸有正常的科學細微差別已經失去了問題的方式，我們已經傳達這部分因為它的政治化。

We've tried to come up with simplistic certainties which have proved to be far too simplistic.

我們曾試圖提出簡單化的確定性，但事實證明這太簡單化了。

And we've divided the entire scientific community in tow.

而我們已經把整個科學界都分化了。

Particular simplistic camps where they're absolutely definite.

特別簡單化的陣營，在那裡他們是絕對確定的。

That one course of action is right and science just doesn't work like that.

那一種做法是正確的，而科學就是不這樣做的。

The honest answer is we really do not know how this is going to turn out talkto hospital doctors, and many will tell you how concerned they are about the impact of co vid on the NHS.

誠實的回答是，我們真的不知道這將如何轉出與醫院的醫生交談，許多人會告訴你，他們是如何擔心對NHS的co vid的影響。

Andi.

安迪

Its ability to cope those warnings cannot be ignored.

其應對這些警告的能力不容忽視。

But do we risk not paying enough attention toe other impacts?

但我們是否有可能對其他影響不夠重視呢？

Sage have in fact, model the impact of the other harms on in official press conferences.

賢人有事實上，在正式的新聞發佈會上，其他危害的影響模型。

They have had some attention, idea weaken do this without causing harm is an illusion.

他們已經有了一些注意，想法削弱做到這一點而不造成傷害是一種錯覺。

But it is case rates, hospitalizations and deaths that get primary billing.

但主要計費的是病例率、住院率和死亡人數。

Although it is easy in a sense, to count the deaths from covert encounter hospitalizations, we should be always trying to measure the what else is going on in society in terms of mental health in terms of, you know, again, life satisfaction in terms of abuse, family break up and so on.

雖然從某種意義上說，統計因祕密遭遇住院而死亡的人數很容易，但我們應該始終試圖衡量社會上還有什麼其他的心理健康方面的情況，你知道，同樣是生活滿意度方面的虐待，家庭破裂等等。

The first of the World Health Organization's guiding principles, say's health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity, Recent figures from the Office for National Statistics suggested.

世界衛生組織的指導原則，說的健康是一個完整的身體、 精神和社會福祉，狀態和不只是沒有疾病或虛弱，最近的數字從國家統計局建議。

In Britain, things are not looking good.

在英國，情況不容樂觀。

This graph shows how people respond When asked how satisfied they currently are with their life, the blue dotted line is just pre pandemic.

這張圖顯示了人們的反應 當被問及他們目前對生活的滿意度時，藍色虛線是流行病前的情況。

We can see that the latest restrictions have coincided with a massive fall in life satisfaction.

我們可以看到，在最新的限制措施出臺的同時，生活滿意度也大幅下降。

It's now at its lowest ever level.

現在是歷史最低水平。

Daisy Fan Court is also looking at the impact of the pandemic.

雛樊閣也在關注這場大疫的影響。

She leads the cove in 19 social study on ongoing study of over 70,000 adults.

她在19個社會研究中上司了對7萬多成年人的持續研究的海灣。

Future Ah, lot of people are starting to find the mental health toll of this building up again.

未來啊，很多人又開始發現這棟樓的心理健康損失。

Now, as we're starting to go back into more restrictions, we found that mental health improved over the summer, but it started to take a downwards trajectory over the last few weeks.

現在，當我們開始回到更多的限制中時，我們發現心理健康在夏天得到了改善，但在過去的幾周裡，它開始採取向下的軌跡。

I think it's critical that we do talk about how people are experiencing this more broadly so things like whether people are finding it difficult, their mental health, particularly talking more about the inequalities of this pandemic psychologically and socially, as well as in terms of the transmission of the virus.

我認為至關重要的是，我們必須更廣泛地談論人們是如何經歷這種情況的，所以諸如人們是否感到困難，他們的心理健康，特別是更多地談論這種大流行病在心理和社會方面的不平等，以及病毒的傳播。

With governments everywhere having finite money, it is common practice to evaluate what spending brings maximum health benefits.

各地政府的錢都是有限的，通常的做法是評估哪些支出能帶來最大的健康效益。

Not doing so means things that should get funding could miss out, Department of Health guidelines say.

衛生部的指導方針說，不這樣做意味著應該獲得資金的事情可能會錯過。

For every 20 to £30,000 spent on medical treatments, it should bring at least one year's worth of good health.

每花2到3萬英鎊的醫療費用，至少應該帶來一年的健康。

Other government departments, such as the Department for Transport, take a different approach.

其他政府部門，例如運輸署，則採取不同的做法。

They calculate that safety interventions could broadly be valued at something in the region of £2 million for the saving of a life.

他們計算出，安全乾預措施的價值大致在200萬英鎊左右，可以挽救一條生命。

But we aren't necessarily doing the same for Cove it the trade offs that we are making.

但我們不一定要為科沃它做同樣的交易，我們正在做的交易。

It needs to be made more explicit so that we can so that we can have informed conversations that are not polarized between pro and anti lock down.

它需要更加明確，以便我們能夠進行知情的對話，而不是在支持和反對鎖定之間進行兩極分化。

That doesn't that's not helpful.

這並沒有什麼用。

There's a moral case for examining how we use our public resources to best effect.

我們有道德上的理由來研究如何使用我們的公共資源以達到最佳效果。

We're moving, perhaps from a period off emergency response to it, to a more on ongoing a chronic situation of living with Cut the covert virus on.

我們正在移動，也許從一個時期 關閉應急反應，它，到一個更多的持續 一個長期的情況下，生活與削減隱蔽的病毒上。

That, I think, brings in health economics more clearly in terms off the need to evaluate the costs and benefits of different causes of action.

我認為，這使衛生經濟學更清楚地認識到，需要評估不同行動原因的成本和效益。

Professor Sam EV ringtones Experience in Tower Hamlets has led him to worry about an imbalance in our debate.

薩姆教授EV鈴聲在塔哈姆萊茨的經驗使他擔心我們的辯論中的不平衡。

It's always about co vid covert deaths, covert cases, but actually, my biggest warriors a GP is ALS patients not coming forward with early cancer heart disease.

它總是關於co vid隱蔽的死亡，隱蔽的情況下，但實際上，我最大的戰士一個GP是ALS患者不站出來與早期癌症心臟疾病。

So one of the problems when you focus just on death and co vid numbers alone time is you creating mass fear, actually, rather than actually taking the approaches of about treating people's adults for a start but also making sure it's balanced despite there being a range of experts from across science who were consulted by the government scientific advisory group for emergencies.

是以，當你只專注於死亡和co vid數字單獨的時間的問題之一是你創造民眾的恐懼，實際上，而不是真正採取的方法，關於治療人們的成年人的一個開始，但也確保它的平衡，儘管有一系列的專家從整個科學誰是諮詢政府科學諮詢小組的緊急情況。

Some believe the focus has been too much on medicine and not enough on broader society.

有些人認為，對醫學的關注度太高，對更廣泛的社會關注度不夠。

There hasn't been much diversity afford that.

沒有太多的多樣性負擔得起。

The reason for that was that when this began, you have relatively small committee's interested in a particular thing who normally don't get much attention interested in viruses onder the spread of those the group who are not included the people who study society as a whole on what actually matters to most people's lives in the round so often with science, it's complex, nuanced, uncertain dangling of apparent certainty appeals because it helps make sense of what is happening.

原因是，當這開始時，你有相對較小的委員會的興趣在一個特定的事情誰通常不會得到太多的關注感興趣的病毒onder那些傳播的群體誰不包括的人誰研究社會作為一個整體的實際事項，以大多數人的生活在圓形所以經常與科學，它是複雜的，細微的，不確定的懸垂明顯的確定性呼籲，因為它有助於使意義上的發生。

But how well is the media been able to grasp uncertainty?

但媒體對不確定性的把握能力如何？

And if they haven't, how has this impacted on science?

如果他們沒有，這對科學有什麼影響？

I think it must be quite a shock for the general public to see scientists disagreeing so vehemently with each other, because the traditional view of science, which I think is misguided, is that it's a sort of monolithic body of agreed fact, E s and the media is responsible for this to a large extent by saying scientists say, and ridiculous statements like that.

我想對於普通大眾來說，看到科學家之間如此激烈的分歧一定是相當震驚的，因為傳統的科學觀點，我認為是被誤導的，它是一種一元化的約定俗成的事實，E s和媒體在很大程度上要為這一點負責，說科學家說，以及這樣的荒謬言論。

But those of us you know within their within science know that scientific communities air at each other, hammer and tongues.

但是，我們這些人，你知道在他們的科學內部... ...知道科學界的空氣在對方，錘子和舌頭。

What we're finding is that the fact that it's the most negatively associated with mental health is following the news on covert.

我們發現，事實上，它與心理健康的負面關聯最大，這是在暗中關注的新聞。

I think a lot of the media headlines have focused on covert itself, but I think that might be Part of the challenge for some people is if they're not feeling particularly scared about the virus itself anymore.

我認為很多媒體的頭條新聞都集中在隱蔽本身，但我認為這可能是一些人面臨的部分挑戰，如果他們對病毒本身不再感到特別害怕。

Perhaps they're more concerned about the wider consequences the viruses having for their lives.

也許他們更關心的是病毒對他們生活造成的更廣泛的影響。

Then it could be that the headlines, they're not speaking to people in the way they were the start of this pandemic.

那麼可能是頭條新聞，他們沒有以這種流行病開始的方式對人們說話。

More families are going to lose loved ones before their time.

更多的家庭將在他們的時間之前失去親人。

It's now over eight months since the start of a pandemic that has changed everything, including for science, but with increasing evidence that our response to Cove it has so many other impacts are we allowing needs to be captured and aired?

現在已經超過8個月了，因為大流行病的開始已經改變了一切，包括對科學來說，但隨著越來越多的證據表明，我們對科夫的反應它有這麼多其他影響，我們是否允許需要捕捉和播出？

I'm not quite clear where the balance lies between 19 and aspect of the 19 response, and I think that's a great uncertainty So what?

我不太清楚十九大和十九大反應的方面之間的平衡點在哪裡，我覺得這是一個很大的不確定性，所以呢？

Those of us in the scientific community and the pediatric and health community I think need to do is feel that we are able to raise thes concerns raised.

我們這些在科學界和兒科和健康界的人，我想需要做的是覺得我們能夠提出所提出的關注。

These issues be taken seriously each day.

這些問題每天都要認真對待。

The science around Cove it is becoming clearer.

圍繞著科夫它的科學越來越清晰。

But perhaps the biggest certainty of all is how much we still don't know.

但也許最大的肯定是我們還有多少不知道。

Yeah.

是啊。