Fructose and HFCS: Once again the "skeptics"* are wrong.

[Humanist_Activist]

204. The scientific should be used to inform policies, but aren't policies themselves....

the problem is that skepticism and critical thinking are best applied towards claims of fact, not opinion. Some people have difficulty differentiating the two.

For example, Anthropogenic climate change is happening, its a fact, and the job of scientists are to report these facts, its then the jobs of politicians, engineers, society, business, etc. to figure out how best to tackle the challenge of reducing our carbon footprints to reduce the amount of climate change happening. The problem is you have a shitload of politicians who outright deny the facts and evidence. Makes it very difficult to pursue sound public policy.

But, and this is key, very few hot button issues with such far reaching consequences are so clear cut, most are a lot fuzzier, being less reliant on hard or easy to find facts, and more rely on studies of human behavior and belief. Its not the science can't help inform, its that this information can then be interpreted in any number of ways, leading to policy differences in which both sides have valid points. Not really a case where skepticism can be easily applied.