The Trouble With "Antiscience": Regulatory Science, Politics, and the COVID-19 Pandemic.

We argue that the label "antiscience" is inaccurate and counterproductive and that its use may hamper the implementation of public health goals. The current crisis is the result of a complex dynamic of loss of trust, rooted in the very real limitations of regulatory science and the inevitable tensions of the relations between science and politics. These have created a political opportunity structure for interested actors to construct mistrust in expertise relating to the production, authorization, and dissemination of scientific facts. We illustrate these dynamics through 3 brief case studies of debates about what constitutes "correct" science in France, Brazil, and the United States during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The case studies show the decisive role played by political factors in determining how these struggles were concluded. We argue, therefore, that "antiscience" is not a quality inherent to a particular policy or claim but is a selectively applied and context-dependent label, shaped by political authority, institutional trust, and discursive framing. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print October 1, 2026:e1-e6. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2026.308749).