I am not sure it is helpful to read too much into what is and is not social constructs. This looks like something scientists might use to try to discriminate what they believe is and is not science.
You touched on this when you mentioned that sometimes science "Gets things wrong", in other words it develops, evolves.
As humanity evolves, our ability to shape the world around us evolves. Capitalism, which you dismissed as a social construct, has very definite, existentially damaging physical consequences and dependencies which you might miss, if you just dismiss it as simply a social construct.
So getting it wrong about social constructs is an existential mistake.
This is something that religions, which I am sure you will also dismiss as social constructs, try to warn us about.
What we need to understand is that there are consequences, real physical, existential consequences, for believing we have no control over certain things, when actually we do have control, and the minority in control are steering the majority over a cliff, without even realising it.
In this sense, we seem a very juvenile species, our ability to survive as a species looks childlike, so far, and it is a rough old universe out there.
I guess you might say all of that is a social construct also?
Isn't "Scientist" itself, and "Science", a social construct?