Hmmm; Is the Scientific American's "Observations" section equivalent to newspapers' "Opinions" or "Editorial"?
Because while I agree with overall message ("Let's get serious about battling ticks and diseases they spread"), there is a strange mix of scientific/data-based; political/opinion-based; and just plain emotional imploring. It brings up the highly controversial Chronic Lyme topic right front and centre, but then attempts to steer itself ambiguously away from it (essentially, "Whatever the case, we need to fight it"). Can the author really be unaware of the immediate guard that will go up on every side of that thorny issue?
Because while I agree with overall message ("Let's get serious about battling ticks and diseases they spread"), there is a strange mix of scientific/data-based; political/opinion-based; and just plain emotional imploring. It brings up the highly controversial Chronic Lyme topic right front and centre, but then attempts to steer itself ambiguously away from it (essentially, "Whatever the case, we need to fight it"). Can the author really be unaware of the immediate guard that will go up on every side of that thorny issue?