All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
May 26, 2015 - Skeptoid
16:26
Skeptoid #468: Listener Feedback: Fads

Brian responds to some listener feedback concerning the topic of fads. Learn about your ad choices: dovetail.prx.org/ad-choices

Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Debunking Health Fads 00:10:27
Today we are headed back to the mailbag to answer some more listener feedback sent in, this time to episodes on particular fads.
This week's feedback seeks some data about the effects of slacktivism, some listeners who still insist that the health fads of oil pulling and cleansing diets are real, and an interesting alternate history opinion on humans' ability to tolerate lactose.
All this and more is coming up right now on Skeptoid.
Hi, I'm Alex Goldman.
You may know me as the host of Reply All, but I'm done with that.
I'm doing something else now.
I've started a new podcast called Hyperfixed.
On every episode of HyperFixed, listeners write in with their problems and I try to solve them.
Some massive and life-altering, and some so minuscule it'll boggle your mind.
No matter the problem, no matter the size, I'm here for you.
That's HyperFixed, the new podcast from Radiotopia.
Find it wherever you listen to podcasts or at hyperfixedpod.com.
You're listening to Skeptoid.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Listener feedback, fads.
Fads come and go.
They always have, they always will.
And whenever one is popular, its most fervent adherents frequently embrace it and defend it with an almost religious fervor.
Consequently, whenever I do an episode that undermines the value of some fad product or activity, I get feedback that reflects that fervor.
Today we're going to the mailbag and respond to some listener emails about the episodes I've done on certain fads.
We'll get started with the Facebook and Twitter fad of slacktivism, the idea that clicking a like button does some good in the world.
JB in Chicago made a quasi-valid point on my episode criticizing slacktivism for being not just ineffective, but worse than ineffective.
You cite a few facts relating to Cony 2012 and the 2014 Vivisectionist photo.
These are anecdotal examples.
I expect you, of all people, to understand the difference between anecdotes and relevant statistics.
Where are all the actual statistics that back up your assertions about the ineffectiveness and destructiveness of slacktivism?
Where are the facts that support the claim that raising awareness is useless or destructive?
You provide literally none.
Don't forget that at the bottom of every Skeptoid episode transcript is a list of references and further reading recommendations.
JB is correct that I did not bring up specific research proving my point in the episode, which I really should have.
But I did include it in the further reading suggestions.
There isn't a whole lot of research specifically about the effects of slacktivism, but what there is is pretty clear.
Before like buttons and online petitions, if you learned about a cause and wanted to support it, your only option was to actually get out a checkbook and send money.
But now that slacktivism has given people a way to feel useful without really doing anything, it turns out that that's exactly what they do.
Research at the University of British Columbia that was published in 2013 in the Journal of Consumer Research found that simple acts of slacktivism can actually have a negative impact on the case.
When people make a public show of support via social media, it turns out that it often satisfies their desire to support the cause without taking any further action, and they end up being less likely to actually do anything useful like volunteer or send money.
When researchers presented subjects with signing a private petition instead that didn't trumpet their support to their social network, it turned out those people were more likely to volunteer or send money.
From the university's summary of the research, they found that the more public the token show of endorsement, the less likely participants are to provide meaningful support later.
If participants were provided with a chance to express token support more privately, such as confidentially signing a petition, they were more likely to give later.
The researchers suggest this occurs because giving public endorsement satisfies the desire to look good to others, reducing the urgency to give later.
Providing token support in private leads people to perceive their values are aligned with the cause without the payoff of having people witness it.
Thus, slacktivism can very easily result in less giving.
We also talked about a more recent fad, oil pulling.
This is where you swish some type of vegetable oil around in your mouth for several minutes, which, if you do it long enough, probably confers antibacterial benefits similar to one quick swish of a common mouthwash.
Joanne from Chicago was one of many listeners who credited it for any of a vast range of unrelated medical benefits.
I am certainly someone who can be categorized as a skeptic.
The technique sounded ridiculous to me when I read about it.
Embarrassingly enough, however, I actually gave it a try when I was having a persistent knee ailment several years ago.
It sounds goofy, I know, but the pain went away immediately.
You'll probably say, oh, power of suggestion, but how come the power of suggestion didn't work on anything else I tried and believed would work?
So give it a try with any of your aches and pains.
You will believe.
It's hard to say this often enough.
Aches and pains usually eventually go away.
That's the natural effect of our bodies healing themselves.
When they do, our brains tend to credit whatever it was we were doing at the time.
In Joanne's case, it was oil pulling.
This is why scientists know that anecdotal experiences, even their own, are terrible ways to learn anything.
Our personal experiences are subject to every sort of cognitive error.
We have preconceived expectations.
We make mistakes and misinterpret things.
We have biases.
If there was sufficient evidence that swishing oil in the mouth treated orthopedic injuries, then we would design blinded, randomized, controlled trials to eliminate all those variables, using a statistically significant number of subjects.
I'm glad Joanne's knee is better, but I think it's very important not to take her advice and simply believe based on her personal interpretation of her experience.
Cleansing juice regimens are a major fad that transfers a lot of money from trendy people's pockets into corporate coffers.
Ivan from Mexico, possibly a customer of such a juice regimen, disputed my conclusion that they're basically worthless.
There are real benefits to a proper cleanse that includes fasting.
Fasting is not about reducing calorie intake.
It's about letting your body and mind rest from everything.
I wonder if this is how valuable ancient knowledge gets lost.
Actually, reducing caloric intake is the definition of fasting.
Resting your body and your mind is always a great thing.
Neither requires the purchase of overpriced magic fruit juices.
And if I understand you correctly, you're characterizing resting as lost ancient knowledge.
I'm afraid I can't agree with you there.
I can't recall ever meeting anyone who doesn't enjoy relaxation now and again, and certainly never met a doctor who advised against it.
In a world that can feel overwhelming, spreading thoughtful, evidence-based content is one of the best ways to make a positive impact.
Ask your local public radio station to air the Skeptoid Files, a 30-minute radio-friendly version of Skeptoid that pairs two related episodes promoting real science, true history, and critical thinking.
And in these challenging times for public media, we're offering these broadcasts for free to radio stations, available on the PRX Exchange or directly from Skeptoid Media.
It's an easy ask.
Just send a quick message to your station's programming director.
By helping to bring the Skeptoid files to the airwaves, you'll help promote the essential skills we all need to tell fact from fiction.
Just go to your local station's website, find the programming director's email address, or just their general email address.
You can even use the telephone.
I know that might sound crazy.
It's an old legacy device that allows real-time voice communication.
I know that's weird, but hey, it's an option.
The world can feel chaotic, but you're not powerless.
When you promote critical thinking, you can help your community tell fact from fiction.
And that's how we shape a better future.
In uncertain times, spreading good ideas can make you feel helpful, not helpless.
Let's stand up for reason, truth, and understanding together.
Get them to air the Skeptoid files from Skeptoid Media, available on the PRX Exchange, and they'll know what that is.
There were a lot of comments on my episode about Halotherapy, sitting in a salt-lined room in the vain hope of treating a variety of medical conditions, that said it can and does treat asthma as evidenced by the fact that doctors sometimes prescribe saline solution nebulizers or inhalers to help loosen up and remove mucus from the lungs.
It should be noted that asthma is the inflammation and constriction of lung passages.
It is not the collection of mucus in the lungs.
Here's a snip of one such comment from David in Melbourne.
I am overturning the medical consensus here in Australia as our results are spreading to more and more doctors.
We even have doctors who use the therapy for their own condition.
Brian, explain to me why a saline nebulizer is used by the medical profession to help clear the lungs of an asthmatic or any other respiratory condition for that matter.
He's talking about a bronchosaline inhaler.
It's quite simple.
Gluten, Autism, and Celiac Disease 00:04:03
Getting high humidity into the lungs helps to break up mucus and loosen anything trapped in it like dust or pollen or the other things we breathe in.
It's the same reason people with clogged lungs often use humidifiers.
The salt has nothing to do with it except to bring the water vapor closer to the body's normal acidity level and make it more comfortable to inhale.
It also has a mild antimicrobial effect.
But if used by itself, for example, if you were to inhale aerosolized salt in one of these salt therapy rooms, the salt by itself is a desiccant.
When used in this way, it accomplishes exactly the opposite of why doctors prescribe nebulizers to loosen stuff in your lungs that you hope to cough up.
So if David has indeed overturned the medical consensus, as he says, he has not convinced me so far.
Mongo from Austin offered the following comment on my episode about gluten-free diets, perhaps one of the most prominent food fads of the last decade.
Sun is autistic, gluten-free for years, is in amazing shape even though he works out very little.
Prior to going gluten-free, his stools were never normal, never, and his mood swings are so much better.
What it comes to is what works for you.
Wheat gluten does not work for him, period.
This is typical of food fads.
People credit them for curing anything and everything.
Absolutely zero legitimate published research indicates that diet can treat autism.
In fact, there's no known cure at all.
That removing gluten or any other protein from the diet would treat it is nonsensical.
The main symptom of celiac disease is malnutrition.
Gluten inflames the walls of the bowels and prevents other nutrients from being absorbed by the body.
Malnutrition has never been shown to be a plausible cause of autism, which is largely believed to be genetic.
Unless your autistic child is really skinny and unable to put on weight, there's not even a sound reason to have him tested for celiac to see if removing gluten from his diet might help him.
If your son is autistic and cutting out gluten helped him put on weight and improve his stools, then perhaps he is one of the estimated 33,000 Americans who is both autistic and has celiac disease.
Jimmy in the UK talked about another popular food fad, raw milk.
Mr. Dunning's biggest stake against raw milk is that it contains harmful bacteria, so we pasteurize it and so there is less bacteria.
He even cited how many children nowadays fall ill due to raw milk.
But hey, some of our progenitors were fine, right?
Obviously, this is all weakly understood science, much like how you eat all your meat raw and never cook your eggs.
Damn it, man, read a book.
You're actively endangering kids with this kind of mindset.
I caution you against getting medical information from books, particularly mass market books.
Just about every type of health nonsense anyone can think of has been found in the New York Times bestsellers list at some point.
If you're looking for specific health information, avoid mass market books, since there's no way for a layperson to know its credibility.
Instead, turn to peer-review research in legitimate medical journals, which are increasingly available online.
Try Google Scholar as a place to start.
To your point about our progenitors being just fine drinking unpasteurized cow's milk, the answer is no, they weren't.
Until a few thousand years ago, all adult humans were lactose intolerant.
Although human babies could always tolerate lactose, people lost the ability as they grew older.
So what we call lactase persistence comes from a mutation that first developed in Europe probably some five to eight thousand years ago, with probably a separate independent mutation arising at some point in Africa.
The History of Lactose Intolerance 00:01:52
And it spread pretty slowly.
It wasn't until about 1,000 years ago that most people could drink milk.
Before that, we had to make do with cheese or even yogurt.
The bacteria cultures that create the cheese and yogurt also inhibit the growth of the dangerous bacteria like E. coli.
So listeners, keep that feedback coming.
Skeptoid exists only because of you and your financial support.
And we'll continue doing our best to answer your feedback.
You're listening to Skeptoid, a listener-supported program.
I'm Brian Dunning from Skeptoid.com.
Hello everyone, this is Adrian Hill from Skookum Studios in Calgary, Canada, the land of maple syrup and moose.
And I'm here to ask you to consider becoming a premium member of Skeptoid for as little as $5 per month.
And that's only the cost of a couple of Tim Horton's double doubles.
And that's Canadian for coffee with double cream and sugar.
Why support Skeptoid?
If you are like me and don't like ads, but like extended versions of each episode, Premium is for you.
If you want to support a worthwhile nonprofit that combats pseudoscience, promotes critical thinking, and provides free access to teachers to use the podcast in the classroom via the Teacher's Toolkit, then sign up today.
Remember that skepticism is the best medicine.
Next to giggling, of course.
Until next time, this is Adrienne Hill.
From PRX.
Export Selection