This article hit me hard.

I'm a scientist and consider myself progressive. I also covered COVID for Slate. I started by largely toeing the establishment line, ended writing much more critically. It took me years to fully grasp what I was seeing and what Dan describes very well: outcome-driven reasoning shaping expert opinion in ways I’d add, most individual experts couldn't recognize in themselves.

People (including me at times) justified being less skeptical of certain findings (or just unconsciously were applying inconsistent standards) because it felt safer to err toward a preferred outcome. A well-intentioned "we know best" culture colored everything, from which studies got funded, to how evidence was interpreted, to how findings were communicated. But I just kept seeing claims that didn't match the underlying data, and it was really hard to raise questions without being vilified. It infuriated and disillusioned me.

I still fight every day against the trust I lost in major knowledge-producing systems (eg, science, journalism). There is a real problem here, and too few people inside these institutions will examine it honestly.

I say this as an insider and believer in these institutions.