don's report archive

by Donald B. Ardell, Ph. D.

Wellness in the Headlines
(Don's Report to the World)

"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands."
{Doug Adams, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, 1987}

"In the beginning, the universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry, and has been widely regarded as a bad idea."
(Doug Adams, The Restaurant at the End of the Universe, 1980}

The failure of our species to respect what ought to be common sense thought processes is, in my opinion, the basis of much mischief in the universe, including everything from our inability to recognize a duck when we see one to the omnipresence now and throughout human history of organized religions. While it helps to attempt reforms and I'm all for it, I really don't expect to see major changes in effective decision-making in my lifetime. But, that's OK, I'm not going to lose sleep over it, since I don't think that would do anybody any good, especially me. What I will do is suggest little antidotes to the problem that some folks, now and then, might find helpful in finding ways to make better choices, live healthier lives and have more fun.

In that spirit, here are ten specific "hazards to rational thinking" with a few suggested examples of bemused skepticism that can minimize their seductive appeal. Most are inspired and adapted from "a brief primer on quackery" by Chris Schissel taken from the online monthly newsletter CFI-LI/LISH INQUIRER, dated February 2004, Part 2, distributed by Gerry Dantone.

As often discussed at this site, bemused skepticism is a style of critical thinking supportive of lifestyle artistry. A bemused skeptic does not feel the need to immediately accept or reject assertions, claims, offers and the like. (He/she is free to do so and often does, in cases of sensational nonsense, but never feels compelled or otherwise obligated to commit at once.) He simply declines, with panache and otherwise in a stress-free, agreeable manner, to adopt (or reject) a position, a proposition or a viewpoint pending further consideration. Doing so signals neither consent nor rejection of whatever it is someone alleges or promotes. Further, the bemused skeptic is always aware that the burden of proof (or at least some evidence of a credible nature) rests upon those who put forth a proposition or ask for consent, action and the like.

With that in mind, here are a few examples of hazards to rational thinking, with suggested interpretations, that might be helpful on occasion for those who choose to operate as bemused skeptics.

1. The label reads, "It's all natural." All or partial "natural" is not informative, or necessarily a good or necessary thing. Venom from a rattlesnake is natural but that does not mean it will do you any good if administered by the snake. Everything that is natural is not necessarily good for you.
2. The label indicates it has chemicals. If it's chemical, it's not necessarily bad for you. Like everything, it depends. The first two lessons apply to other terms used in food labeling by purveyors of slick but deceptive advertising. "Organic" is not always meaningful or desirable and "artificial" is not always a bad thing. As noted, it depends-on many factors. ("It's easier to be original and foolish than original and wise." Liebnitz).
3. The horoscope (or psychic analysis, magician mind-reading, etc.) seems to fit your situation. This does not mean much. Most people welcome feedback about their personality. Many give credence to astrology and the like because of "the fallacy of personal validation," a condition wherein we welcome generalized personal assessments, especially if flattering, as specifically true of ourselves that are in fact only trite and bogus descriptions true for nearly everybody.
4. Flattery lulls better judgment. Flattery tends to increase the chances for consent. Of course, we all use this in varied ways as we learn basic socialization skills in our formative years, but it applies as well in subtle ways for marketers due to the infamous "Barnum effect" about how often (every minute) a sucker comes into the world. We fall for compliments and are skeptical of criticism.
5. We resist information at odds with our beliefs. Evidence clashing with current convictions can spark an emotional resistance, as would a personal attack. Such evidence, however strong, is likely to be denied. A bemused skeptic will want to be alert for logical fallacies, poorly designed or faked studies, testimonials and anecdotes. All are the methods of quacks, not lifestyle artists or wellness seekers by any term. Science always trumps pseudo-science; there are no good "alternatives" to proper treatment. In the last analysis, we (not our doctors) are the final arbiters of what is proper treatment in specific instances.
6. Credentials and appeals to authority are exploited by quacks. As often as not, credentials are not relevant or they are phony. Sometimes, those with genuine credentials make mistakes. Be alert to logical fallacies, falsehoods, unsupported assertions, anecdotes and testimonials, all earmarks of the quack.
7. Quacks use "us versus them" logic. They use varied appeals that exploit existing suspicions or resentments (for example, "rich doctors"), paranoia ("they" are hiding "the truth" about cancer, the environment) and so on. Quacks also appeal to American notions of freedom, individuality and resistance to control and dogma--they imply that by buying their stuff you are striking a blow for these worthy positions.
8. Placebos can be mistaken for cures. Chronic symptoms wax and wane, often improving on their own. The quack is quick to take credit. Other ways that quacks manipulate is with misdiagnoses, taking credit for spontaneous remissions and creating illusory problems, all of which they claim to cure. The inquiring mind will look for independent verification of diagnoses and claims.
9. Complicated language mixed with illusory principles. An example is the claim by chiropractors that all diseases stem from "subluxations," misalignments of the spine. I'm also suspicious of TMJ (temporomandibular joint diseases/ disorders). One need not be a dentist to be suspicious--these reservations are based on challenges to this condition by reputable dental groups. In any event, beware pseudo-terminology; jargon commonly employs emotionally loaded catchwords (alternative, holistic, prevention and yes, even our beloved word of words, "wellness").
10. Derisive attacks on valid therapies. Quacks offering alternative cancer remedies might describe conventional surgery, radiation and chemotherapy as "cut, burn and poison." In fact, such approaches, although expensive and highly unpleasant, have saved lives. The scare language of quacks, if not viewed with systematic thinking and assessment, leads unsophisticated patients away from effective treatments.

Oddly, there might be a greater danger in going to a sincere quack than a quack that knows he's a quack. The latter's fear of legal consequences may act as a restraint, to some extent, and improve the chances he won't actually kill you; the former, on the other hand, believes so fervently in what he's doing he's more likely to go all the way!

Critical thinkers make a habit of paying attention to controlled studies (or the absence thereof) and objective evidence to assess whether a procedure is safe and effective. They are guided by reason and science and do their best to remain alert to the toxic nature of dogmas.

Be well, and look on the bright side of life.

(Note: This essay will be filed in the archives in the MENTAL DOMAIN under the skill area of effective decisions. Additional articles related to this theme may be found there.)

(Ed. Note: Views expressed in this and other columns are those of the author and not necessarily those of the SeekWellness Editorial Board.)

 Send e-mail to Don Ardell