Pandemics are marked by the prevalence of a disease across a large population, including a global population. In fighting diseases, our greatest tool of offense is science and our greatest tool of defense is science communication. Yet the leadership of the United States has expressed open disagreement with our nation’s scientists and continued to push solutions that do not have the backing of science. What are the ramifications of this behavior on our society?

Bureaucracy is getting in the way of the communication of necessary information to the public. I want to provide an explanation for the public theater that's taking place, as well as solutions for how the public can avoid it.

It can be really damaging to researchers when people misuse research to suit agendas that are unrelated to the actual content of the study. A reminder is needed: science doesn't choose sides.

Talking to each other has become fairly difficult, yet it is the only way to be societal. Yet another case where two sides exist.

Pseudoscience is cancerous. Basing practices on ineffective, but believable studies is no different than preying on those whom are easily influenced.

Many have not heard of science communication, although those same people may know science communicators. Their importance lies in how accessible they make science to the public.

It is hard to believe that science could be used to discriminate, when science itself is built on observation. We should turn our attention, then, on the people who believe they are preaching good science, when they are actually communing with knowledge that has been updated.

There is a fundamental healthcare problem in the Untied States. However, the problem is not that we are mismanaging wealth. It is that we are aware of the significance of efficiency, yet fail to care about it.