Sodium fluoroacetate

Some people meditate to find their inner calm, some medicate. But my golden rule for maintaining equilibrium is “do not read the comments”.

This week I’ve had to break that rule, to conduct my research into the position of anti-1080 activists. Scholarly research into 1080 opposition is proving a challenge.  Scouring Google Scholar and Web of Science I find a wealth of peer-reviewed literature available that examines, in clinical detail, the effects of possums on forest canopies and bird populations, the effects of 1080 on waterways and native species, the tested results of 1080 exposure on possums, game, humans, birds and invertebrates, and the environmental consequences of doing nothing to reduce possum numbers.

But where is the evidence from the anti-1080 brigade? Talkback Radio, social media, newspaper articles. I’m finding it difficult to maintain (any illusion of) objectivity in my assignment, as I read about hoaxes, death threats and hostage taking, murdered pets and the threat to contaminate infant formula. On social media sites, articles about successful bird breeding seasons post-1080 drops provoke hysterical, aggressive comments from opponents, that descend quickly into personal attack. In contrast the responses from conservationists – scientists both amateur and academic – tend toward the measured and reasonable, and they consistently direct the opponents of 1080 to one thing: the peer-reviewed science that is so readily available. The opponents’ apparent resistance to accepting or even reading this literature is astonishing.

In between searching the literature, I’ve enjoyed reading the course material about writing position papers. I’ve found that working on the initial framework of narrowing down the issue to a number of key points and outlining the opposition argument fairly has helped me to keep my emotional reactions and my need to ‘be right’ in check. A bit. (I particularly enjoyed the tip about framing the opposing view in a straightforward way, and then pulling out the poetry for persuading people to the opposite.)  Finally this week, the research tips: reading selectively and skimming for the relevant points. I was very heartened to read this; the whole time I’ve been studying I’ve felt I was ‘cheating’ somehow by doing this. I’ve been thinking I’m rushing research and ought to be reading more comprehensively. But in the light of this advice I realise there’s a difference between skimming to cherry-pick facts, looking for evidence of your own preconceived opinion, versus skimming strictly for relevance. So now that I know I’ve been doing it right, I’ll have to find something else to feel guilty about. Murdering possums maybe.