Most are familiar with the fictional world of Star Trek where humans are emotional and Vulcans choose not to be. We’ve been fascinated by the battle between cold logic and hot emotionality because we recognize it. While reality can be stranger than fiction, they can also mirror one another.

I wonder what Spock’s response would have been to Brigitte Brown’s persuasive opinion article in last week’s issue (“Consider the tragedies prevented by vaccines”)? Her long list of anecdotal stories (minus one sentence about long-ago vaccine injuries in Japan) attempted to paint a convincingly pro-vaccine picture: fear of disease, helpless parents and doctors, disappearing children and verbiage such as horror, fury, searing grief, miracle and lucky. Captain Kirk might have been swayed, but I imagine Spock would have lifted his logical eyebrow.

The subject of public health is what we’re talking about. And some concepts from 100 or 60 or 30 years ago still make sense. Some don’t. Brigitte’s article makes one valid point. We don’t want to return to the way things were. Absolutely true.

Brigitte’s childhood memories and gathered stories, however, present only one slice of a huge pie. There are other stories which have been conveniently ignored. This is why anecdotal stories are viewed as non-scientific manipulatives. They hook us emotionally and inspire us to pay attention, but they aren’t answers, evidence, proof or data. In other words, they aren’t scientific.

The scientific method thrives in an environment of curiosity, openmindedness and exacting methodology. Patience and challenging peer-reviewed checks and balances are also important. Which is why fear is problematic. Frightened people make hasty decisions, and that is bad for public health.

So, let’s put our thinking hats back on, please. Because, as Spock would say, “Logic is the beginning of wisdom, not the end.” And “Insufficient facts always invite danger.”

— March Twisdale