Dr Kathryn Muyskens1
1Centre For Biomedical Ethics, National University Of Singapore, , Singapore
Biography:
Dr Kathryn Muyskens is a Research Fellow with CBmE, with a focus on Asian Bioethics, Elder Care, and AI. Originally from Colorado in the U.S., she came to Singapore in 2015 to pursue her PhD in Philosophy from Nanyang Technology University, graduating in 2019. She is a political philosopher and applied ethicist by training, and has research interests in human rights, and healthcare justice, and cross-cultural bioethics, with particular interest in trust, information, and inequality in access to healthcare.
Abstract:
Misinformation about health is rampant, especially online. This was true long before the recent Covid-19 pandemic. This pandemic is both longer lasting and more intractable. In fact, misinformation has often emerged in tandem with plagues (i.e. the AIDs crisis of the 1980s, the cholera outbreaks of the 1800s, and the Black Death during the Middle Ages). Like viruses, misinformation has proven its ability to cross borders, and its destabilizing effects are manifold. The range and variety of misinformation is staggering, from suspicions that vaccines are a ploy to make money, to the accusation that the mRNA vaccines are a part of a Satanic plot to make the world infertile. When people are misinformed about health, they make poor decisions, some of which have serious consequences – including death. Fueling this crisis is a vicious cycle of the erosion of trust in public institutions like science and medicine. What we face is a crisis of both medical and scientific literacy, as well as a loss of perceived moral authority in these institutions. Yet, the popular explanation – that this phenomenon is driven by an ignorant populace – falls short. It leaves unexplained the high number of educated individuals who nevertheless fall for and spread medical misinformation themselves. Neither does ignorance seem to account for the overlap between the victims of medical misinformation and historically oppressed groups. A better explanation is wanting. By exploring the realm of epistemic vice and epistemic injustice, this paper will attempt to offer that.