Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Disputed expertise and chaotic disinformation

Covid-19 and denialist physicians in Brazil

Bibliographic Data

ID2395576
AuthorsKenneth R De Camargo Jr (0000-0003-3606-5853, Instituto de Medicina Social Hésio Cordeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume61
Issue5
Pages714-723
Publication date2024-10-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueTranscultural Psychiatric Research Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0041-1108 • E-ISSN: 0315-4386
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/13634615231213835
PMID38234170
OpenAlexW4390984074
LanguageEN
Citations received7
References cited29

This article aims to show how incorrect ideas about COVID-19 were promoted by physicians in Brazil, contributing to a catastrophic response at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives, and to examine the implications of this episode for the social studies of science, technology and medicine. The literature on the relationship between science and society takes two broad approaches, which are sometimes at odds with each other: (i) there is a traditional critique of science that points to unsupported claims of certainty and thus undue interference in general human affairs; (ii) there are many examples of attempts to undermine reasonable scientific claims, when they clash with economic and/or political interests of certain groups. Navigating those extremes is particularly critical in situations in which accurate knowledge is necessary for intervening in people's lives, as is the case in health-related issues. Determining who has actual epistemic expertise is a key factor in solving this conundrum. This became painfully clear during the unfolding of the COVID-19 pandemic, which highlighted the uncertainties of science in guiding decisions being made in real time, and provided opportunities for many forms of disinformation and conspiracy theories that hampered public health measures and promoted useless or even dangerous 'treatments'. This article discusses an instructive example of such developments in the chaotic response to the pandemic challenge in Brazil, which saw, among other unfortunate situations, physicians aligned with the denialist federal government advocating for unproven - or proven as ineffective - treatments and disseminating unfounded doubts about vaccines. Presumed expertise on the basis of professional training clearly did not translate into actual expertise in the necessary domains to ascertain the validity of such claims and scientific advice was overridden by ideology

Certainty · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19 · Disinformation · Epistemology · Government (linguistics · Misinformation · Odds · Pandemic · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Social media · Sociology · Law · Medicine · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment · Vaccine Coverage and Hesitancy

  • Salvando a Ciência

    Open Access•Ana Gretel Echazú Böschmeier•Revista Mundaú•2024

  • Public Health, Science, and the Public’s Trust

    Kenneth R De Camargo Jr•American Journal of Public Health•2026

  • Scientists as Experts in Public Debates Characterised by Scientific Uncertainty

    Open Access•Pauline Mattsson, Eugenia Perez Vico•Minerva•2025

  • Publicação acadêmica

    Open Access•Kenneth R De Camargo Jr, Claudia Travassos•Saúde em Debate•2025

  • Contested Illness and Alternative Expertise Networks in Global Health

    Open Access•Renan Gonçalves Leonel Da Silva, Amanda Curi et al.•Sociology of Health & Illness•2025

  • Long Covid, the unending pandemic

    Open Access•J Segata, Ilana Löwy•Horizontes Antropológicos•2024

  • Covid longa, a pandemia que não terminou

    Open Access•J Segata, Ilana Löwy•Horizontes Antropológicos•2024

  • Science as Practice and Culture

    Andrew Pickering•Science As Practice and Culture•1992

  • Denialism

    Open Access•Pascal Diethelm, Martin Mckee•European Journal of Public Health•2008

  • Revising the “Hype Pipeline” Model in Scientific Communication

    Open Access•Natália Pasternak Taschner, Luiz Gustavo de Almeida et al.•Frontiers in Communication•2021

  • The hydroxychloroquine alliance

    Open Access•Guilherme Casarões, David Magalhães•Revista de Administração Pública•2021

  • How to Talk to a Science Denier

    Lee Mcintyre, Lee C Mcintyre•How to Talk to a Science Denier•2021

  • Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact

    Ludwik Fleck, Thaddeus J Trenn et al.•Genesis and Development of a…•1981

  • Post-truth

    Open Access•Sergio Sismondo•Social Studies of Science•2017

  • STS as science or politics

    Open Access•Harry Collins, Robert Evans et al.•Social Studies of Science•2017

  • Real Science

    Open Access•Augustine Brannigan, John Ziman•The Canadian Journal of Sociology•2002

  • The Third Wave of Science Studies

    Open Access•H M Collins, Harry Collins et al.•Social Studies of Science•2002

  • The Thought Style of Physicians

    Open Access•Kenneth R De Camargo Jr•Social Studies of Science•2002

  • Public health and the knowledge industry

    Open Access•Kenneth R De Camargo Jr•Revista de Saúde Pública•2009

  • The Social Construction of What

    Ian Hacking•Social Construction of What?•2000

  • Why democracies need science

    H M Collins•Why democracies need science•2017

  • Trying to make sense out of chaos

    Open Access•Kenneth R De Camargo Jr•Cadernos de Saude Publica•2020

  • Medical populism

    Open Access•G Lasco, Nicole Curato•Social Science & Medicine•2019

  • How to identify science being bent

    Open Access•Kenneth Rochel De Camargo, Kenneth R De Camargo Jr•Social Science & Medicine•2012

  • Hydroxychloroquine Controversies

    Open Access•Luc Berlivet, Ilana Löwy•Medical Anthropology Quarterly•2020

  • Why Has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern

    Latour, Bruno Latour et al.•Critical Inquiry•2004

Unique citing works7
Citations per year3,5
Citation span2024 - 2026 (3)
Citation velocitycurrent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 7

Tools

Open DOI
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae