From the posted article: " By this, I do not mean the death of actual expertise, the knowledge of specific things that sets some people apart from others in various areas. There will always be doctors, lawyers, engineers, and other specialists in various fields. Rather, what I fear has died is any acknowledgement of expertise as anything that should alter our thoughts or change the way we live."

You are absolutely correct. It stems from many things and the book you are reading will certainly address much of them. I have long said that ethnocentricity is the bane of humanity, and until we find a way to overcome it, we will continue to struggle as a human race.

Reminds me:
In the best of worlds the police are British, the lovers French, the mechanics German, the chefs Italian, and it is all organized by the Swiss.
In the worst of worlds the police are German, the lovers Swiss, the mechanics French, the chefs British, and it is all organized by the Italians.

By using a bit of critical thinking. Some areas are obviously more difficult to tease out, but a solid BS detector will get there. I think half the battle is won if you can eliminate the garbage you shouldn't be consuming. If you have a Hollywood star giving medical advice, your BS meter should be screaming. If you have someone promoting something, anything, without a shred of quality evidence to back it up, your BS meter should be screaming. If you have a orange buffoon telling you to take hydroxychloroquine without a shred of quality evidence to back it up, your BS meter should be screaming. If you have a pediatrician on TV talking about infectious disease and epidemiology, your BS meter should be humming in the background and pushing for confirmation of the information from actual infectious disease experts to make sure the information is congruent. If not, guess whose opinion I am going to put more weight on? The actual expert. Not the kinda sorta related expert.

@Amzungu So take Dr Fauci, for example. Is he someone you would consider an infectious disease expert? If he is, how is it possible for anyone in the general public to know that the expertise he is promoting doesn't have some particular motive when conflict of interest, corruption and bribery is so rampant within our systems? I have heard, from other "infectious disease experts", that he was involved in creating the current coronavirus. Also, whose BS meter is correct when 1/2 of the public's BS meter is pinging and the other 1/2 of the public says it is not BS? Can we so flippantly say that the 1/2 that doesn't agree with us is just dumb? It is easy to hate 'orange buffoons' because it is popular but how do we know he isn't just sharing knowledge he received from other "infectious disease experts" who either have a different opinion or motive than Dr Fauci. It makes me think assessment of expertise, without some serious investigation and in depth background and historical information about the person dispensing, is largely subjective and nearly impossible. Especially considering all of the experts we have telling us what to do or what is good for us in every aspect of our lives.

@beenthere if one is using a proper BS meter, the BS will fall apart in the process of assessing it. One big mistake the public makes is thinking that 'authorities' are the same as experts, but that is not true. Trump is an authority, and whether you love him or hate him, you cannot consider him a scientific expert when he has zero scientific education or experience. So when using a BS meter for a situation like the chloroquine issue, it is an easy decision to trust the expert, such as Dr Fauci, who has served multiple presidents in his position and has an entire career in the field of infectious disease, who has been nothing but consistent in his information dissemination, has not played a bit of partisan politics, and consistently offers information based on available evidence and research that is easily independently verified. There is no question who should be listened to, regardless of who the authority may be getting his information from, because none of it is known and what is disseminated is mere anecdotal evidence that is not independently verifiable. The authority argument falls apart through BS detection assessment. Those things should also give you as much confidence as humanly possible that there is no ulterior motive within the expert's advice, though admittedly no one can ever know that 100% and the more corrupt our systems get, the harder it becomes to trust anyone. But I don't think the answer is to trust no one and give everyone's input equal weight because that end would be a hotter mess than the one we're currently dealing with. As far as whose BS meter is right when a population seems so divided on an issue, I am going with the one which survives the assessment process. I've always been a fan of Sagan's BS detection kit. Posted for your viewing pleasure.
[brainpickings.org]

@Amzungu As before, I appreciate your perspective and ability to articulate. When it comes to BS, it seems waders are needed these days. We are swimming in manipulated data, information and statistics which translates to propaganda on a massive scale. And to what end or for whose benefit? So it may be that, in general, BS detectors are overwhelmed trying to contend with the daily massive assault. Perhaps, a grain of salt is a healthy antidote to our confirmation bias. And the death of expertise, per se, may be a cyclical re-balancing which is necessary.

@beenthere well said.

Before the Information Apocalypse harms too many people there will be laws passed. Fraud doesn’t have First Amendment protection.

Agreed, there are multiple causes for the increase in infectious diseases outbreaks in developed countries and distrust in experts is only one among them; but, especially in the US, I think it is the one that has had the most impact on spurring the anti vaccine movement. I do agree that there should be greater surveillance of immigrants' vaccination and exposure status. I have no idea what the current processes may be, and surely illegal immigration subverts any of that, but it seems more needs to be done. Unfortunately, valuing public health requires a vision of greater proportions than what our narrow minds seem to allow us. We're far more focused on prevention and persecution where immigration is concerned. Safe assimilation seems a mere afterthought.

@Amzungu The immigration is a very serious and complicated one and few really take the time to understand it. We have traditionally limited the immigration levels to some 1/4 million. After the Vet Nam debacle the numbers were increased to repatriate the supporters from S. Viet Nam. Industry came along and wanted a source of cheap and controllable labor and lobbied congress (and paid off some environmental groups (ZPG and the Sierra Club). Terminology and politics were changed and now we have reached a dire situation. This virus may bring us back to some real sanity. We need to understand this should not be about people but a sustainable and workable policy under which all must live, immigrants and citizens alike.

@JackPedigo Immigration is a complex issue. Though I do firmly believe that the melting pot status of the US is among our greatest strengths, we just haven't figured out how to fairly and productively embrace that.

@Amzungu I agree somewhat. Every gain also comes with some pain. In this mornings paper was a long article on how the indigenous people suffered from the pandemics brought to this area from European settlers. It is still ongoing and even brought to light how some practices (animal husbandry) have only made the problems worse. [washingtonpost.com] Hope you can get this. Also the book 1491 highlighted how there were vast and powerful civilizations already in the Americas before the Europeans came and they had a culture some say rivaled the Europeans. In the end it's all about conjecture not real proof.

The bottom line is life is about evolution and if we stop evolving we will perish. Evolution is not cultural but adapting to the world and all the problems it brings. In 1491 it showed how having an overabundance of cultural diversity actually caused tribal states to implode. As you said it is very very complex. In case you are not aware I lived in Europe for 15 years. I am the godfather of a son born to a Syrian/Turkish family, my sister-in-law is Vietnamese and my late partner was Iranian. She understood the complexity and problems of excessive immigration better than most.

@JackPedigo ANYTHING in excess is toxic, and I guess that's precisely my point. We;re good at "doing it wrong" but I think there are ways to achieve better balance and greater communal gains, and maybe one day we will figure out how to "do it right". I view greater diversity as a positive thing, however, there are inherent complex aspects that come along with it, and to make it a net plus for all, these things need to be engaged on a deeper level by all sides.

@Amzungu Thank you for continuing this conversation. However, I have had this discussion many times. Even my own sister-in-law, a professional biologist, doesn't get it. Aldo Leopold once said “A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. It is wrong when it tends otherwise.”

Diversity is about biotic diversity not human cultural diversity. A basic, undeniable fact is that the more humans in a given place the less the biotic diversity! Too many cooks can and do spoil the broth. We really need to stop putting humans at the center of the planet. To quote my late partner's question to her 2nd grade students: What is more important, people or dirt? You are right excess in most things is toxic and that especially includes us.
[hcn.org]

I absolutely understand where you're coming from. Historical medicine is one of my favorite rabbit holes. We have done some horrible, inexcusable, atrocious things in the name of medical research, but we have also infused countless protections to ensure such things don't happen in the future, done some truly amazing things, saved countless lives, and too often today are being wholly judged by the bad actions of a few.
I vividly remember a patient encounter I had when I first became a nurse. A patient was scheduled for a routine screening procedure, which typically got booked out further than diagnostic procedures where a problem was present. So she waited for a month to have her testing done. While reviewing her chart the day before her procedure, I realized she only needed the procedure as a prerequisite for a lung transplant she was waiting to get on the list for. Our delay with her procedure also delayed her getting on the transplant list. Our schedulers knew about the transplant list issue, but did not note the information, so it was not caught until she was due to come in. Had I known, she would have been scheduled within a few days, and I felt horrible that our 'mistake' had caused a delay. When she arrived, I immediately went into her room and explained what had happened with the scheduling of her appt and sincerely apologized for the mishandling of her scheduling. The lady started crying and took my hand. She said to me "mistakes happen, and had you not said anything, I would have been none the wiser and simply thought that it was the way it was supposed to be. I am not crying because I am upset with you. I am crying because you showed the integrity of acknowledging it when you didn't have to, and I don't see that too often in this world."
I have been lucky to work with people whose professional integrity I respect, and who value honesty with their patients, but I do realize there are all kinds in the profession, just like any other, so it's not a blanket defense. I just see a very different side of the medical world than those who are only focused on the errors from the past.
Though, now we have Trump degrading many of those safeguards, eliminating liability, rushing approvals without sufficient evidence to support them, and paving the way for corporate greed to reign. That is most definitely not how we encourage and build trust in medical professionals. If the research isn't done properly, or regulations are rushed, doctors are being given tools without the proper information supporting them. And that is not okay.

@Amzungu protecting the profits of medical corporations MADE THE PROBLEM WORSE so the wrongs continue to kill and force needless suffering upon people.....