Science tries to understand the world; engineering, problem solving. They are probably the most powerful tools created by humans. For better or for worse. They allow us to go beyond ourselves, as José Antonio Marina would say.
Both are profoundly human approaches to reality, with no intellectual hierarchy between them: one is not worth more than the other. The two are compatible and need each other. But they are not the same, their products are different. They built different philosophical buildings to relate to the world: science to understand it, engineering to act on it.
Despite our limited knowledge, vaccines prevent death and lifelong sequelae; limit the impact of the infection; protect the weakest members of the community and all that, also by covid-19
The practice of medicine is not a science; it is an engineering of the body, which seeks to solve the patient’s healing problem. The analogy could be the construction of a bridge: what we want is to extend it from one side to the other, and for that, we don’t need to understand the molecular basis of the elasticity of concrete. Of course, there is medical science and research, but in medical practice – as in construction, as in engineering – problem solving knowledge is enough.
Vaccinology is not a science either.. The understanding of immunological mechanisms falls far short of practice in the design and use of vaccines. It’s been that way since the smallpox vaccine. In fact, we don’t really know why some vaccines work very well and others don’t, nor what is the ideal time between booster shots, nor whether it’s better to vaccinate everyone or give several boosters to the most susceptible.
But despite our limited knowledge, vaccines are the first and most important line of defense for many diseases: they prevent deaths and lifelong after-effects; when they don’t, they limit the impact of the infection; they protect the weakest members of the community. And all this, also for covid-19.
Predicting does not mean understanding. We didn’t need to fully understand the process of salting ham to make guijuelos and jabugos
We don’t know, because we understand little. But we don’t even know why we understand so little. We’ve accumulated mountains of data on many vaccines and use it to make models and try to predict what might work. And in this groping we are, at the limit of what we know – a candle in the dark, Carl Sagan would say – trying to see where to go. Now, predicting does not mean understanding.
Dulcinea, data and decisions
An operational example – one among thousands – that we have in cured ham: We know the ideal conditions for salting, humidity and temperature – Dulcinea had the best hand in all of La Mancha for salty pigs – but we don’t really know what happens in the process. It is not necessary that it has made us, historically, make guijuelos and jabugos.
Another example, statistical this time: the mathematical functions that describe the behavior of a set of radioactive atoms tell us that the shroud of Turin is medieval, but looking at a single radioactive atom gives us no clue as to when it will decompose.
It is also worth remembering that data is necessary but not sufficient to make an informed decision. The proportion of vaccinated persons who may be (re)infected with the omicron variant, or the age of the infected persons, is given. But we need to transform them into information: get them standardized and in large quantities, connect them, cross them, build models with them, make predictions, design public health interventions. Perhaps it proposes solutions to the pandemic problem. Later, perhaps, you will understand.
If we’re smart, science and engineering will be part of the solution. Otherwise, they will be the alibi to justify bad decisions. Or they will become the scapegoat
This pandemic has exposed how little we understand about the lifestyles of viruses. But it showed us, above all, that neither science nor engineering are capable, by themselves, of understanding the world or solving a problem in real time when the crisis is global, when local interventions are costly and of limited effect, when decisions have to be taken without having all the information.
Without a doubt, there will be more crises that humans will have to deal with in the next thirty years. If we’re smart, science and engineering will be part of the solution. Otherwise, they will be the alibi to justify bad decisions. Or they will become the scapegoat, guilty of having enabled humanity to walk the path to the edge of the precipice.
Ignacio González Bravo he is research director at the Laboratory of Infectious and Vector Diseases: Ecology, Genetics, Evolution and Control (MIVEGE) of the French National Center for Scientific Research (CNRS).
Source: SYNC
Rights: Creative Commons.
.