It’s a process not an end state.
“Follow science” and ‘follow “the” science’ are two different things, and we just need to go back in history to understand that humans did some horrible stuff because of “the” science.
“Follow science” and ‘follow “the” science’ are two different things, and we just need to go back in history to understand that humans did some horrible stuff because of “the” science.
To me when they say they “follow the science” it does not imply an end state. To me it only implies “everything we know so far”.
I am sure that if scientific results showed the opposite of their current idea, they would once again update their view.
E.g. heliocentrism, germ theory, cigarettes being unhealthy, lobotomies being optimal