Manufacturing Certainty (in Pseudo Science) People's Laziness

[Guest guest]

MANUFACTURING CERTAINTY (in Pseudo Science)

http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/health_risks/Pseudo.htm

By Crowe

" Tests indicate that you have a 90% chance of being infected with a

deadly virus. There is a 50% probability that it will cause disease

within the next 10 years, and a possibility that it never will. If

you take the drugs that I offer, there is a significant risk that you

will experience a great decline in your quality of life, and a

possibility that the drugs will kill you. "

Although it might be the truth, you are unlikely to hear a doctor

saying this, because neither the doctor nor the patient can deal with

the uncertainty that it admits.

(I left out parts of this article)

People demand simple answers to complex problems and modern medical

science delivers. We are told that tests are highly accurate, that

drugs will cure conditions or, if that is not possible, that they are

the best bet. We are told that environmental conditions play little

role in modern, emerging diseases. Alternative therapy is scoffed at

because it has not been `proven' effective through randomized,

placebo-controlled clinical trials.

The fundamental reason why this confidence game continues to be

played is because of human laziness.

It is much easier to learn about science by rote than by examining

evidence and making up one's own mind. Obviously, not every

pronouncement on science can be taken seriously, so the status of a

person or publisher becomes the way to distinguish between " good

science " and " junk science. " Many people do not believe that they

have the ability to understand scientific papers.

The media, even most science reporters, are much more productive if

they also adopt this attitude. Among scientists, there is a hierarchy

which is constructed from the anonymous peer review system for

publication and grant support. This allows longer-serving officers of

science to anonymously subvert the attempts of younger scientists

(and outsiders) to reappraise current dogmas, by denying them the

ability to publish and obtain research funding.