In continuing the discussion of the false dichotomy, I still see the inevitable question from media types (both regular and social) asking basically why doesn’t Mr. Trump edict to the red state yahoos that are not taking this seriously. After all, science must be the arbiter of this decision.

I think its important to remind ourselves that “science” and “the data” never speak; only people who speak on their behalf. And not surprisingly, there are different perspectives as to what the science and the data say. And that’s ok–its precisely the free debate and competition for truth that leads us (usually but not always) to a bit better understanding. It’s not just a bunch of Republicans making this claim, there are significant and accomplished scientists that think we are way overblowing this issue. My point is not that these contrarian thinkers are right, but much more fundamental: there is no way at this point in time in saying who is right. The data are coming in and they are mixed. And this is the critical point: getting more data in, from more different experiences will help us make more informed decisions. This is why we want many researchers and pharmaceutical companies trying different approaches for both therapies, testing, and vaccines.

For many weeks, Sweden has been pilloried by some for having a much more laissez faire approach to the virus. They’ve embraced social distancing, but much of their economy is continuing, albeit with altered processes to increase safety. The results are mixed, such that both critics and supporters have some credence in their evaluation. But my point is that the world benefits by having Sweden make this effort and being different. The very act of trial and error, with many approaches, is much more likely to lead to a better way forward for all. Now we shouldn’t force people to embrace more risky activity because we want to learn from it, but neither should we try to force them not to do it because we “know” what’s best for them.

It’s the same situation here in the U.S., and why federalism offers us significant hope. The states are different in many respects, and seeing their different responses and then the different outcomes is much more likely to provide the best pathway that we all move toward with modifications for local circumstances. Further, this won’t be our last pandemic. If we were to pick one approach now, under what basis could we claim to know it was the right one? How would we have learned as much as we need to if we effectively only run one experiment? The hubris of the elite must be put back in the box. On this one, I’ll settle for the wisdom of the many crowds, because its too early to settle on what wisdom really is.