I agree with what you are saying, but it isn’t your best edited work to follow. I keep thinking of the many times that moneyed interests have controlled the discussions, especially when regulations are concerned. Fluoride is one of those examples, as is the fat vs sugar research, glyphosate and rBGH. We want to believe that universities are bastions of independent research, but money is the dominant species. I also see a gap in the concept of scientific theory verification, but I am going to keep assuming that the majority of scientific specialists are honestly trying to test theories completely, including looking for new ways to disprove common assumptions. Meanwhile, our use of common technology and chemistry is dangerously ahead of prudent safety tests, usually due to profits and deregulation. This gets even more confusing when the proponents of regulations are also enamored with new technology that supposedly is beneficial (pesticides, irradiated food). We end up with required additional dangers or disguised shortcomings (massive uncleanness) that are difficult to remove from the system, or needed technology (modern nuclear energy) being promoted by people who are not known for trustworthy behavior (Republicans) when it comes to safety. In short, science has been radicalized illogically and politicized monetarily. Science, like everything else, only gets attention for Spectacle or Fear. Teaching people to be rational and methodical doesn’t sell cars, Viagra and beer.