To make a good health-related decision nowadays one needs thorough and extensive research. But with modern unprecedented access to information the issue of its reliability becomes critical. Plainly speaking it is not easy to find information you can really trust.
Traditional criteria, like 'provided by reputable government agency or academic institution' do not guarantee you an honest answer to your question.
As it was already mentioned regarding sun block, some government agencies prefer to vocalize 'legally safe' opinions - i.e., the most conservative and mainstream-science-approved. These opinions may be ineffective or simply wrong - it doesn't matter. What matters is that no one can accuse an organization or individual for promoting them.
In couple of years these highly regarded agencies and institutions might change their recommendations, but we must keep in mind that nobody ever said 'O-ops, sorry!' to people who already took another controversial pill.
As it was already mentioned regarding sun block, some government agencies prefer to vocalize 'legally safe' opinions - i.e., the most conservative and mainstream-science-approved. These opinions may be ineffective or simply wrong - it doesn't matter. What matters is that no one can accuse an organization or individual for promoting them.
In couple of years these highly regarded agencies and institutions might change their recommendations, but we must keep in mind that nobody ever said 'O-ops, sorry!' to people who already took another controversial pill.
The referrals to a 'scientific study' also do not guarantee you truth, because depending on financial backing of the study, its interpretations may be more favorable to a certain drug producer.
And then there are honest mistakes, simplistic approaches and unwarranted conclusions...
And then there are honest mistakes, simplistic approaches and unwarranted conclusions...
We also tend to trust general statements like 'scientifically proven' or 'FDA approved'. Unfortunately, the first can be groundless while the second - only relevant to immediate side-effects.
And one must always be very careful with a statement made by people intending to sell you something.
And one must always be very careful with a statement made by people intending to sell you something.
I usually do my research in circles, refining key words in the process and providing comparative analysis to selected pieces of information. I also try to evaluate possible motives of their authors. Eventually this helps me to formulate the working assumption, and then I am looking for evidence proving or refuting it.
My professional skills and knowledge in the areas of patent analysis and Anticipatory Failure Determination [1] come handy here by providing variety of tools for the purpose of revealing underlying root-causes and motives. But for those who are not familiar with any of these I would rather recommend listening to their gut feeling and common sense than mindlessly following any 'professional' advice.
In this free, abundant and challenging modern world no stranger is responsible for our well-being and pursuit of happiness.
[1] Anticipatory Failure Determination approach (AFD) – the methodology of revealing root-causes and predicting potential negative events. AFD is the part of the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving (TRIZ).
No comments:
Post a Comment