Role_of_Expert_Knowledge

The disputed role of expert knowledge in understanding and managing risk in our every day lives Contents Page Page 2 Contents Page 3 Introduction & Risk Society Page 4 Ulrich Beck Theory Page 5 Case Study Allotments & Poisoning Page 6 Case study Sun exposure Page 7 Case Study Mobile Phones Page 8 Epidemiology & Uncle Norman Page 9 Conclusion Page 10 References & Self Reflection Introduction: This report has been produced to explain the disputed role of expert knowledge in understanding and managing risk in our everyday lives. The aim is to look at what we mean by a risk society and how Social Science and individuals understand, negotiate and live with risk on a daily basis. Risk Society: Societies as a whole are more aware of risks that face them than they ever have been. This public awareness is brought about by governments both local and national being more open about legislation and providing the public with more information to enable them to make informed choices. What do we mean by a risk society' Risk society is an account of contemporary society that emphasises the development of the side effects of modernisation and the growth in many people’s awareness of risk. (Carter and Jordon, p80,2009). Risk is also defined as a state which there is a possibility of known danger or harm which if avoided may have benefits The fact that there is more information available to the lay person on the street can be a positive thing with everyone being more informed, but it could also have a negative impact with more information bring more responsibility and confusion and to the lay person more information could also bring fear of the unknown or of having too much information, after finding out about things that in years gone by they would have been blissfully ignorant about. Ulrich Beck Theory [pic] Who is Ulrich Beck Ulrich Beck is a German Sociologist who holds a professorship at both Munich University and at the London School of Economics. (Wikipedia.co.uk) Beck’s Theory • People have an increased awareness of risk involved in everyday life. • People are more reliant on an “expert” opinion to expose and explain the risk. • Increasing uncertainty surrounding the risks. • People are less confident in the ability of the expert to manage the risks effectively. Evidence case study Allotment and poisoning The first of our case studies will examine how the soil changed from safe to highly dangerous and back to being safe again: An individual who was given an allotment in the London Borough of Hackney (LBH). Chronology of events: • Safe soil in 2003 • New legislation in 2005 • Dangerous soil in 2005 after a test revealed arsenic and lead. • Nine months of testing followed. • Safe soil new testing method revealed all back to normal and poison levels deemed “safe” and O.K. to garden again Risk involved: 1. Health risks due to poison being ingested 2. Health risk to bare skin due to being in touch with contaminated soil 3. Adult and children exposed to poisonous substances such as arsenic and lead Reward: 1. Organically grown vegetables 2. Exercise 3. Fresh air 4. Healthy living Test 1: Soil Test This measured the total amount of poison in the soil. The soil was tested by a laboratory, results in parts per million, results compared to the soil guidance values (SGV) provided by the Environment agency via the UK government. Test 2: PBET (Physiologically based extraction test) This test measured the total amount of toxin in the soil, measuring how much of the poison in the soil is accessible to a humans biology, also known as bioaccessibility, this result provided much lower levels of poison within the soil. Both tests carried out gave results that showed there was a danger posed by the soil and although the PBET results could be considered shaky evidence, due to the variance of results in the differing laboratories used for testing, as the PBET test gave a much lower reading of poison and the level was within the SGV guidelines most of the gardening population accepted this as the allotments now being safe and continued with their gardening duties. [pic] [pic] Evidence case study Sun Exposure This case study examines the risk involved of sun exposure and the reward involved in partaking in such an activity. Risk involved: 1. Sun Burn 2. Skin Cancer/Melanoma Reward: 1. Invigorated & Feeling good 2. Glowing Tan 3. Compliments from others Statistics: 1. In 2010, 12,818 people in the UK alone were diagnosed with malignant skin cancer 2. Approx. 100,000 diagnosed with non-melanoma skin cancer 3. In 2010 there were 2,746 deaths from skin cancer in the UK alone. Statistics taken from “http://www.cancerresearchuk.org” As you can see from the statistics presented above skin cancer and melanomas is still a disease that can kill and yet people due to their fear of reprisal from others of being a “Peely-wally” and standing out from the crowd and not having what is considered a contradiction in terms of a glowing tan, there are people who are still willing to take the risk and expose themselves to this danger for the reward of looking and feeling good. Social scientists have completed studies including • focus groups • interviews • questionnaires Results of these often show that people are aware of the risks involved and how to avoid them, however those who choose to partake often consider the risk something they are willing to take to gain the panache of looking good and feeling more attractive a risk they are willing to take. Evidence Case Study Mobile Phones [pic] [pic] “Mobile phone radiation is a possible cancer risk, warns WHO” (Guardian.co.uk (2011) |Mobile phones 'safe for brains' | | | | | | | | | (BBC News.co.uk (2005) As you can see from the two different news headlines above there is conflicting information in relation to the use of mobile phones over the years: This is another example of something that started its life as safe a number of years ago and now due to “expert” opinion is something that comes with a risk. This is a risk however that millions of people around the world face every day. The experts have failed to advise on a number of things and left a variety of questions in the lay persons mind leaving the general public wondering what experts they can trust and to what degree they can trust this expert opinion. Epidemiology and Uncle Norman Epidemiology is the study or the science of the study of the patterns, causes and effects of health and disease conditions in defined human populations. It is the cornerstone of public health, and informs policy decisions and evidence-based medicine by identifying risk factors for disease and targets for preventive medicine. Epidemiology has evolved over time due to a reflection of changes in the patterns of mortality rates, when non infectious diseases took over acute infections as the leading cause of death. This is when the use of probabilities emerged in relation to health risks (Carter & Jordon, p84 (2009). The aim of using the probabilistic approach was to find a link between a disease and the factors involved that may aid the diseases progression. In contrast to the theory of Ulrich Beck the study of epidemiology reinforces the point that public or lay knowledge is active and sometimes opposed to that of the expert, this is also evident in the sun exposure case study above. Epidemiology is used for a variety of reasons including insurance to calculate risks for life insurance and mortgages. Epidemiology is something that is widely used but may not be widely known about as in the media it is often referred to as “scientists have found”. A whole population can due to epidemiologic research be asked to change their behaviour and bring about something known as the prevention paradox, when research shows that something can bring relief to the masses but offers very little to the individuals. Swine Flu and flu vaccines are a couple of examples. Uncle Norman and the last person • Uncle Norman smoked excessively and ate fatty foods & lived to a grand old age • The last person did not smoke, ate healthily, exercised and was the “last person you would expect to contract an illness” The Uncle Norman and the last person figures are descriptions that lay people have come to use in terms of Epidemiological research when making sense of health advice. Conclusion So in conclusion this report shows • Society is more aware of the risks and dangers faced • Research and evidence is ever evolving and changing • This leads to confusion and frustration with “expert” advice However it also evident that even with all the facts and knowledge available it is the individual choice and people do tend to use their own experiences and practices to make sense of and judge the importance of what is classed as expert knowledge and that expert knowledge is very much open to interpretation by the lay person. Based on the evidence given in the previous case studies it is clear that Ulrich Beck had a point on people having to have what is classed as “expert knowledge” before proceeding to give advice and that regardless of the risk involved at the end of the day the choice will still rest with the individual choice. Word Count: 1,284 References: ‘A risky world’ (2009) Exploring social lives, (Audio CD1), Milton Keynes, The Open University. Bromley, S., Jeffries. E., Meegan, J and Staples M (2009) DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences, ‘Learning Companion 3’, Milton Keynes, The Open University www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/types/skin www.Drinkaware.co.uk www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/may/31/mobile-phone-radiation-cancer-risk (2011) http://www.skincancer.org/skin-cancer-information/melanoma www.Wikipedia.co.uk ‘Writing Social Science reports’ (2009) Exploring social lives (Audio CD7), Milton Keynes, The Open University Woodward, K. (2010) Social Sciences the big issues. Self Reflection: During this assignment I have enjoyed learning about expert and lay knowledge and I have given myself more time with this assignment and cut back on the overtime at work. I have found cutting the word count extremely difficult on this assignment.