Science is often seen as the gold standard in policymaking—objective, rigorous, and self-correcting. But what happens when the science itself is uncertain, contradictory, or unreproducible?

Over the past two decades, concerns about replication, statistical misuse, and institutional bias have shaken confidence in science—from medicine to psychology to public health. Yet, institutional confidence in science seems unshakeable. And with rising polarization and decreasing trust in institutions, the need for epistemic humility and stronger standards of evidence has never been clearer.

Today’s guest is one of the world’s most cited—and most courageous—scientific voices confronting these challenges. Dr. John Ioannidis is Professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Population Health at Stanford University. His landmark 2005 paper, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” helped spark the understanding of the replication crisis in science. It remains one of the most widely viewed and cited medical articles of all time.

Dr. Ioannidis has written extensively on statistical misuse, social pressures that distort research, and how we can improve the reliability of scientific knowledge—especially when it’s used to guide public policy.

As someone who cares deeply about how we make sound decisions in an age of information overload and institutional distrust, I’ve found his work indispensable to understanding both the promise and the limits of “evidence-based” policy.