The Covid-19 pandemic has made celebrities scientists, who have made daily headlines and gained numerous subscribers on the networks social.
But this rise has been accompanied by online abuse and even physical harassment.
The journal Nature interviewed scientists, who have describes receiving threats of violence after media appearances.
Discussions about vaccines or the drug ivermectin were common triggers for harassment.
Scientists have been abused in the past when discussing climate change or previous vaccination campaigns.
The self-selection survey of 321 people working in fields relevant to Covid found that more than a fifth had received threats of physical or sexual violence.
While this is not representative of all scientists and may not reveal the extent of the abuse, it does provide insight into some of the personal experiences of those who have come to the public eye to give information during the global epidemic of the disease.
Six people who responded to the questionnaire reported being physically assaulted as a result of media appearances.
Some of the more extreme cases have been widely reported. Belgian virologist Prof. Marc Van Ranst s ' is found in a safe house after being the target of a trained far-right sniper (since found dead) who despised containments and threatened to kille kill health professionals.
The The UK Chief Medical Advisor Professor Chris Whitty was assaulted in a park by a 24-year-old estate agent, while two prominent German scientists were given labeled bottles of clear liquid "positive " and a note telling them to drink it.
Media caption, Covid: NHS doctor 'receives 20-30 abusive messages per day '
U.S. infectious disease physician Krutika Kuppalli, who gave interviews to national media and testified before a congressional committee, told Nature that 'she had received a death threat via a phone call to her house.
The Australian virologistDanielle Anderson, who worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and criticized the theory it could be where the virus had escaped from, received an email telling him to "eat a bat and die ".
Professor Andrew Hill wrote a positive review of antiparasitic drug ivermectin to treat Covid but reversed his position once he discovered the data on which he had based his conclusions. was not trustworthy.
Currently available evidence suggests ivermectin is unlikely to be very effective for Covid - but Professor Hill has received an avalanche of abuse, including accusing him of genocide, which kept him away from social networks.
"I was sent pictures of Nazi war criminals hanging from lampposts, voodoo picturesswaying coffins, threats that my family was not safe, that we were all going to burn in hell "he told Hfrance.fr News.
" This happened almost every day - I would open my laptop in the morning to be faced with a sea of hate and ominous threats.
"There were also threats to my scientific reputation by e- mail.
"I know many other scientists who have been threatened and similarly abused after promoting vaccination or questioning the benefits of unproven treatments like ivermectin.
Dr Michael Head, senior researcher in global health at the University of Southampton, said there had been "a tremendous amount of 'abuse targeting all those contributing to the pandemic response ... including frontline NHS staff ".
The behavior specialist from University College London, the proSpanker Susan Michie, said "disturbing" online abuse would occur "more intensely after media engagements and especially after those that address restrictions on social diversity, wearing face masks or vaccination ".
Other scientists interviewed mentioned that emails were sent to their employers or that their professional reputation was questioned.
But among those harassed on their own social media, almost half said they didn't tell their employer.
The Nature survey also found that those targeted by the most frequent harassment were the most likely to say it had affected their willingness to give media interviews in the future.
Fiona Fox, managing director of the UK Science Media Center, which provides scientific commentary and briefings to journalists, said it was a "great loss if a scientist who got involvedacted with the media, sharing their expertise, is withdrawn from public debate at a time when we have never needed them so much ".