Less drama more science

After tackling several “issues” or hot topics on our Program AGENDA on Cignal & TV5 such as the Dengue Outbreak, the Provincial Bus Ban, Reclaiming Public Roads and the likes, I’ve arrived at the conclusion that there is far more drama that goes into these issues than there is science, facts and figures, least of all common sense. There is never a lack of opinion, position and accusations and especially scare tactics. But once you start poking around and asking people to provide the science or results based on studies behind their claims, you’ll see that the heated argument starts to cool down a bit. On some rare occasion, people will cover up their lack of science or common sense by going ballistic or full hater mode against their opponent. Whatever their strategy maybe, the fact is you can’t beat science, data and actual studies when it comes to proving your point.

I’m glad that Malacañang has decided to take an “open-minded” position on addressing the dengue outbreak relative to the possible re-introduction of Dengvaxia because only a person such as President Rodrigo Duterte can tell everyone to shut up and work on a credible solution without anyone starting an argument or a debate. Only President Duterte can tell the combatants and rabble rousers to go back to their respective corners and do their actual jobs and stop jabbing at other people in government. Everything we know about Dengvaxia and the battle against dengue is merely a drum full of hatred and politics. What we need to get is scientific data and facts not allegations or ill will. 

When we talked about dengue and Dengvaxia on AGENDA, the fireworks went off immediately and focused mainly on discrediting the pro and con to Dengvaxia and immunization as the solution. Both sides had enough bitter and malice to throw into the pot but when I asked if any scientific controlled studies had been done to track those who’ve been vaccinated with Dengvaxia and what were the results? The anti side pointed out the alleged deaths being associated with Dengvaxia. Problem was the probers refused to share the data or results with the DOH and Secretary Duque for legal and lawyer reasons. The pro immunization side pointed out that no such study could be done because the public school immunization program for Dengvaxia only reached the second phase or injection #2 instead of the full three injections required. That in itself would tell me that any claims against Dengvaxia being deadly or useless is weak if not viable because the vaccine program was never completed and therefore rendered useless.

I almost ended my search there but then I remembered my daughter Hannah and her classmates whom I was told were part of about 3,000 students who got the full vaccination. When I asked “what about the private school students who were vaccinated?” Both sides in the argument went silent! Evidently, the people who’ve been squabbling and politicizing Dengvaxia were all too focused on slandering each other that even as doctors and public policy makers, they forgot the science part that could tell the truth and nothing but the truth!

By chance, I recently spoke to one of my personal doctors who works at a government hospital and he told me that on the whole the great majority of dengue patients are non-immunized, arrive at the hospital often very ill or compromised. He has heard of three cases of patients who have been vaccinated with Dengvaxia but still contracted dengue and what he observed was that their conditions were less serious or complicated and that they manage to recover faster than non-immunized patients. Our conversation happened over dinner, no cameras, no officials, two friends just sharing information. How difficult is it to get more information such as this so policy makers and the media can help save lives and not listen to grown up physicians argue while children die!

*      *      *      

In the numerous occasions we’ve invited authorities to explain or present the science behind the Provincial Bus Ban or the closure of bus terminals along EDSA, I’ve often found officials contradicting themselves. For instance they claim that the provincial buses causes traffic going in and out of their terminals. But when I pointed out their “victories” due to the MMDA’s “Nose-in /Nose-out” parking policy, they would respond “Yes it helped but there are taxis and Grab cars that create traffic while waiting for passengers from the terminal. So I counter that posting an MMDA enforcer in those locations could solve the problem and simply issue traffic citations all day to those taxis and Grab drivers. I also pointed out that most of the terminals have backdoor access where taxis now drop off passengers.

When you start asking for studies and science, they cite statistics that have no connection to the impact or importance of provincial buses to daily commuters residing outside Metro Manila or the impact on tourism and the provincial bus transport. Someone recently told me that there is supposed to be an old Supreme Court ruling related to the phase out of Bus Terminals that could torpedo what the government is trying to do. Sadly the general impression that’s now beginning to emerge is that our officials who are trying to solve the traffic problem of Metro Manila are scientists in the wrong form of the word. They love to experiment, to try out ideas on the ground but never really consulting a good mix of people or population who would be affected or have a say in the outcome. They experiment at other people’s expense, inconvenience and financial loss. As the Bible teaches us: “There is wisdom in the counsel of many.”

*      *      *

E-mail: [email protected]