More myths and misinformation ...

There’s an interesting divide in America between the people who think they know everything – but are woefully misinformed – and the people who actually know what they’re talking about, but are ignored. 

Not a day goes by that you don’t hear some nonsense about vaccines, genetically modified foods, second-hand smoke, obesity, autism, and whatever. 

Most of it is completely unproven and unsubstantiated bullshit.

Usually it’s because people don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation. 

Think of it this way:  correlation is something two or more things have in common that don’t necessarily lead to a predictable outcome; causation is a direct line from one thing to another. For example, just about everybody who became a heroin addict drank milk at one time or another – that’s a correlation, but this doesn’t mean everybody who drinks milk will become a heroin addict. On the other hand, people who are actually lactose intolerant have digestive issues when they eat or drink dairy products like milk – that’s causation; if you are lactose intolerant it’s highly probable dairy products will upset your stomach.    

Often the nonsense is positioned as a “link” between something and something else.  What they should be saying is that two things may possibly be related, but there may be other factors involved, instead of implying a direct line from one to the other.

I know this sounds overly pedantic, but I am fed up with phony science, specious “connections,” and intellectual garbage and misinformation presented as fact. 

Just because someone who is a “scientist” claims something doesn’t make it so. “Researchers” are often paid shills for special interest groups who either have an axe to grind or stand to profit from swaying public opinion.  Despite the academic-sounding titles of supposedly “independent” organizations, these are usually no more than fronts for someone or some group with a vested interest – they are rarely unbiased.

And don’t believe 90% of what you read on the Internet.  Most of it is self-serving crap. 

So here’s some truth:

• Vaccines can produce adverse health effects in a statistically insignificant part of the population; however there is no data – repeat, no data – proving that vaccines cause autism … but the risk of serious health issues from lack of vaccinations is fully proven.  Also, parents who withhold vaccinations from their children jeopardize not only their children’s health, but the health of others in the stupid, selfish and mistaken belief they are preventing autism.   Meanwhile, poor kids are getting vaccinated because their parents see the bright line connecting vaccinations with avoiding preventable diseases like measles, mumps and rubella.  It’s the more affluent who aren’t vaccinating their precious kids because they’ve read some crap on the Internet about the risk of autism.  As one CDC person said, if you want to know the hot spots for measles outbreaks today, look for areas with a Whole Foods store.  Says it all.
  
  
• Most conditions “on the rise” – such as autism and ADHD – are not really becoming more common.  More often, it’s just a case of a change in definitions lowering the threshold to allow more people to be “diagnosed” with the disease or malady du jour. There’s a conscious and constant escalation of what used to be behavioral issues that passed with time into “diseases” that now must be treated aggressively with expensive therapy and/or recently developed prescription drugs.  This way, parents and teachers aren’t responsible – it’s a medical thing – and doctors and drug companies make big profits.  That’s not to say that autism and ADHD are not real; however, the devil’s in the definition.
  
  
• Genetically modified foods (GMOs) have been around since primitive people first dabbled with selective breeding of livestock.  Rice, maize and other staples have been selectively cross bred with other strains for at least 2,000 years. In short, most of the foods we eat today are the result of altering the genetic makeup of an original animal or food either by nature or by man’s hand.  GMO wheat and rice alone have probably saved billions of human lives over the years – lives that would have been lost because “natural” wheat and rice couldn’t withstand local growing conditions.  Forget “Franken foods” as the misbegotten product of evil geniuses; GMO foods have generally allowed us to live longer and healthier, and fend off famine worldwide.
  
  And like vaccines, there is no direct proven link between GMO foods and autism, ADHD, nor athlete’s foot, ingrown toenails, leprosy, male pattern baldness, etc.
  
  
• All edible food is “organic.”  In scientific terms, organic compounds are defined as having carbon molecules; inorganic compounds are made of salts, metals and other stuff you can’t eat.  Well you could, but you wouldn’t last long.  However, “organic” foods are popularly defined today as having been exposed to no synthetic pesticides or synthetic fertilizers or irradiation, and containing no artificial preservatives, colors or additives. Of course fresh produce is better for you than processed or canned foods.  Yet there’s absolutely no proof that “organic” produce is any better for you or more nutritious than regular fresh produce.  Not everything labeled organic is automatically better, but it’s usually more expensive.  It’s understandable that people would prefer and be willing to pay more for organic alternatives to meat or poultry from animals raised on a diet of steroids and growth hormones; but is “organic” bundled firewood really worth more?
  
  
• Most of how healthy you are and how long you’ll live rests on the genes you inherited. I know, that’s a fatalistic view but it’s true. There’s no miracle diet that cures cancer, no magic exercise that will give everybody six-pack abs, no lifestyle change that will add another 10 years to your life – unless your genes agree.  That’s why some two-pack-a-day smokers who drink 10 cups of coffee daily, and eat nothing but waffles and sausages, can live to be 100 and die peacefully in their sleep.  Meanwhile, some non-smoker vegetarians who abstain from alcohol, sweets, fats, and coffee or tea, and who work out religiously every day, can stroke out on the treadmill at 58.  It’s unfair but it’s true.  Does this mean you should give up?  Of course not.  But the longer you live the more you realize that everything you learn about what’s good or bad for you is subject to change.  One days eggs are poison; the next day eggs are okay.  One day, a couple of drinks a day increases your risk of dying; a little later it’s recommended that everyone have a couple of drinks a day to live longer.  
  
  
• Global warming is real.  So is global cooling. Scientists have no proof that either is caused by humans. For most of us, geologic time is beyond our capacity to comprehend; the global warming advocates who blame humans use this to present a case for sweeping changes in how the world manufactures things and fuels industry and our daily lives based on short-term data. In the 1970s they predicted another Ice Age. When that didn’t happen, they predicted death and destruction from an overheated world. Now the world is cooling again so it’s called “climate change.” They really want us to stop using fossil fuels and instead rely on solar power; they also want to control every aspect of our lives – what we drive, where we live, how we heat and cool our homes, how we grow our food, etc.  Honestly, they are clueless about what causes global heating and cooling, but won’t admit it. They just don't want to let a real or imagined "crisis" go to waste as they try to redesign society.
  
  

So much of what is reported today is bogus. It’s propaganda from people who really should know better – and probably do – but have something to gain from promoting or perpetuating a myth.  Maybe it’s to get more grant money, or boost book sales or speaking fees, or to simply make more money selling something as a solution to a made-up or over-hyped condition. 

Regardless, it’s usually based on bad science.  Suppositions.  Selective use of data. 

And intentionally blurring the line between correlation and causation. 

There’s a big difference between the two.  And it matters.