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.
On the other hand, it’s someone who is depressed each a high amount of sugar and carbs. These foods impact the body and metabolism and do impact once outlook. In the same way that not exercising does not help depression when one is depressed, one often does not feel like moving, yet we have scientific evidence that proves that movement produces positive serotonin which uplifts mood. We are an amalgamation of mind, body and spirit.
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.
I enjoyed your use of Latin... occasionally I offer 'secumdum artem' when trying to compliment a fellow HCP...rarely is it comprehended...the sum of our practice history & education is what makes the practitioner.
Hearing that 28% of the US population are scientifically illiterate explains a lot. The unworldly response to COVID in the US now becomes understandable; nothing other than pure ignorance is on display here.
Surprised I had not thought of my professional example of "association" and most often no causation.
I have never been a 'fan' of the patient information material, frankly an oxymoron in that they are most often not informative.
Anyone who has ever received a prescription for a medication or vaccine has been given an information sheet with that drug/vaccine & in some jurisdictions it is mandated the material be given.
What is rarely & when given, the HCP conveys an explanation & context to what side effects are possibly.
Side effects recorded for any drug/vaccine are those that were reported prior to the agent being approved & in some cases those reported post approval.
Certainly, those observed during the approval evaluation are not investigated for causality & for this reason I find the preprinted PIM of little value.
Qualifier I am not licensed to diagnose any ailment other than a group of those defined as "minor" by my licensing body.
This said, having practiced for almost 40 yrs & haveing post bachelorate degrees & certification I can offer an informed opinion.
Husband & wife recently asked if his swollen hand was the result of a new Rx for acid reflux, in part because of the list of side effects noted on the PIM...nope!
I happily explained, the PIM represents events reported & not proven to be the result of taking the agent.
Gentlemen has had past episodes of gout.
I don't know that is swollen hand was the result of an acute episode of gout yet it would be something to investigate.
The gentleman was encouraged to f/u with his primary HCP to be evaluated.
Author Charles P. Pierce wrote all the way back in 2009 of the dramatic shift in thinking that,
"The very American notion that, because there are two sides to every question, both deserve respect and both must, in some way, be true. The gut tells us that this is only fair, and we are a fair people, after all. All one has to do is muster an argument with enough vigor, package it well, and get enough people to buy both the idea and the product through which it is expressed. The more people buy, the more correct you are."
He further goes on to say that the louder you proclaim your alternate "opinion," the more likely people are to believe you, "since we are all entitled to our opinion. The much lionized American centrists, sometimes known as moderates, are in no way immune to the overwhelming pull of belief systems that treat evidence as a tiresome stumbling block to deeper, instinctive 'ways of knowing.'"
This is the uphill battle we as scientists increasingly face daily in promoting evidence-based arguments in the public square, where supposed "common sense" interpretations - often expressed as "do your own research" - are deemed every bit as "valid," and letters after your name immediately mark you as a "shill." Tough times.
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.
On the other hand, it’s someone who is depressed each a high amount of sugar and carbs. These foods impact the body and metabolism and do impact once outlook. In the same way that not exercising does not help depression when one is depressed, one often does not feel like moving, yet we have scientific evidence that proves that movement produces positive serotonin which uplifts mood. We are an amalgamation of mind, body and spirit.
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.
I enjoyed your use of Latin... occasionally I offer 'secumdum artem' when trying to compliment a fellow HCP...rarely is it comprehended...the sum of our practice history & education is what makes the practitioner.
JJF Phm 🇨🇦
Hearing that 28% of the US population are scientifically illiterate explains a lot. The unworldly response to COVID in the US now becomes understandable; nothing other than pure ignorance is on display here.
Surprised I had not thought of my professional example of "association" and most often no causation.
I have never been a 'fan' of the patient information material, frankly an oxymoron in that they are most often not informative.
Anyone who has ever received a prescription for a medication or vaccine has been given an information sheet with that drug/vaccine & in some jurisdictions it is mandated the material be given.
What is rarely & when given, the HCP conveys an explanation & context to what side effects are possibly.
Side effects recorded for any drug/vaccine are those that were reported prior to the agent being approved & in some cases those reported post approval.
Certainly, those observed during the approval evaluation are not investigated for causality & for this reason I find the preprinted PIM of little value.
Qualifier I am not licensed to diagnose any ailment other than a group of those defined as "minor" by my licensing body.
This said, having practiced for almost 40 yrs & haveing post bachelorate degrees & certification I can offer an informed opinion.
Husband & wife recently asked if his swollen hand was the result of a new Rx for acid reflux, in part because of the list of side effects noted on the PIM...nope!
I happily explained, the PIM represents events reported & not proven to be the result of taking the agent.
Gentlemen has had past episodes of gout.
I don't know that is swollen hand was the result of an acute episode of gout yet it would be something to investigate.
The gentleman was encouraged to f/u with his primary HCP to be evaluated.
JJF Phm 🇨🇦
Author Charles P. Pierce wrote all the way back in 2009 of the dramatic shift in thinking that,
"The very American notion that, because there are two sides to every question, both deserve respect and both must, in some way, be true. The gut tells us that this is only fair, and we are a fair people, after all. All one has to do is muster an argument with enough vigor, package it well, and get enough people to buy both the idea and the product through which it is expressed. The more people buy, the more correct you are."
He further goes on to say that the louder you proclaim your alternate "opinion," the more likely people are to believe you, "since we are all entitled to our opinion. The much lionized American centrists, sometimes known as moderates, are in no way immune to the overwhelming pull of belief systems that treat evidence as a tiresome stumbling block to deeper, instinctive 'ways of knowing.'"
This is the uphill battle we as scientists increasingly face daily in promoting evidence-based arguments in the public square, where supposed "common sense" interpretations - often expressed as "do your own research" - are deemed every bit as "valid," and letters after your name immediately mark you as a "shill." Tough times.
Thank you once again Dr. Andrea
https://www.poetsgraves.co.uk/Classic%20Poems/Pope/a_little_learning.htm
Bravo!