🇳🇱
@thephilosopher@mstdn.io @Science Scientists are not equal to science. By definition if a scientist is acting on bribery, blackmail, censorship, etc, then they arent a scienctist, they arent doing science.
But more to your point, I have never really seen any sentiment that would agree with what you suggest, that they think doctors are infallible. In fact much the opposite, doctors who have been caught acting as a result of bribery or self-interest are usually shouted from the roof tops by other scientists and shamed. A perfect example of this is the doctor who was caught lying about vaccines causing autism. The scientific community also quickly corrected course and considered such publications as debunked.
What you do see however, and what I suspect you may be talking about, is that people require evidence a scientist, especially a well respected one, is subject to bribery or extortion before we start screaming about it. Conspiracy theorists just going "yea well scientists are corrupt so im not going to trust all science" are often the ones corrupted by bias and cant or wont do any legitimate science.
> We often need conduct our own scientific research and investigations to learn the truth.
That is exactly what peer-review is. The ability for anyone to conduct your own research, run your own tests, and then submit it as part of the peer review of a paper to debunk it, under heavy scrutiny and analysis
So yes do your own research, but unless you've done it such that it is open to criticism and debunking you arent doing valid science.
