Tylenol and autism, diet soda and depression, pesticides as bad as smoking: sloppy observational epidemiology drives panic and ignores biology, chemistry, and toxicology.
As always, I am so grateful for your clear, data-driven approach. I am stunned by the impact that pseudoscience is having upon our culture. Nearly every day, I read social media posts about junk science, posted by intelligent, well-meaning people. I attempt to gently debunk at least the most spurious claims, based on what I’ve learned from reputable scientists. It’s a long road….
This is mostly drawn from observational data over my 35-year career as a psychotherapist, but I can claim, with very few exceptions, that depression DOES alter the eating patterns and activity levels of people who are afflicted. Claiming that what they consume causes depression certainly doesn’t show up in my professional journals. It seems to be utter nonsense, and implies that people with depression are somehow responsible for bringing this upon themselves. That’s cruel.
Great piece by Dr. Love. This lesson that correlation is not causation needs to be taught more effectively at all levels of education. It is a classic logical fallacy, often phrased in Latin as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (“with this, therefore because of this”). Correlation can be a starting point for investigation but it is never proof of causation. When observational studies are stripped of nuance, misreported by media, and weaponized by bad actors, they mislead the public, erode trust in science, and distract from the real drivers of disease such as genetics, infections, lifestyle, and social determinants.
As always, I am so grateful for your clear, data-driven approach. I am stunned by the impact that pseudoscience is having upon our culture. Nearly every day, I read social media posts about junk science, posted by intelligent, well-meaning people. I attempt to gently debunk at least the most spurious claims, based on what I’ve learned from reputable scientists. It’s a long road….
This is mostly drawn from observational data over my 35-year career as a psychotherapist, but I can claim, with very few exceptions, that depression DOES alter the eating patterns and activity levels of people who are afflicted. Claiming that what they consume causes depression certainly doesn’t show up in my professional journals. It seems to be utter nonsense, and implies that people with depression are somehow responsible for bringing this upon themselves. That’s cruel.
Great piece by Dr. Love. This lesson that correlation is not causation needs to be taught more effectively at all levels of education. It is a classic logical fallacy, often phrased in Latin as cum hoc ergo propter hoc (“with this, therefore because of this”). Correlation can be a starting point for investigation but it is never proof of causation. When observational studies are stripped of nuance, misreported by media, and weaponized by bad actors, they mislead the public, erode trust in science, and distract from the real drivers of disease such as genetics, infections, lifestyle, and social determinants.