The $3.5 Million Exorcism

Critical thinking continues to grow in importance as electronic media exposes Americans to thousands of sales pitches each day.  The snake oil salesman I referred to last week who pulled into town with his wagon to sell his magic tonic only arrived at long intervals.  Today’s equivalent arrives to our computers or phones every second.  Without a healthy skepticism, questioning before buying or believing, Americans can be tricked into buying all sorts of worthless products and services.

The latest example comes from Reuters, but was all over the Internet about 10 days ago.  “A self-proclaimed psychic who was paid $3.5 million by an elderly Massachusetts woman in exchange for claiming to cleanse her of demons pleaded guilty on Thursday to trying to avoid paying taxes.”  Was the 70-year-old woman a victim of the psychic or was she a victim of that airy-fairy-land that many Americans occupy in their minds, willing to believe in all kinds of mystical, new-age, super-food, and super-supplement mumbo-jumbo?  They develop imaginary allergies and fears of safe foods and life-saving vaccines by ignoring scientific evidence in favor of Internet rumors and unrealistic promises backed by celebrity endorsements.

The first question that comes to minds is:  If she’s a psychic, why didn’t she see the problem with the IRS coming?  The easy, and correct, answer is that she is not a psychic at all.  (No one has ever proven under controlled laboratory conditions that they have psychic powers.)  Anyone who is really a psychic would be winning money at the racetrack or at the roulette wheel.  But they claim they only use their powers for good – good apparently being defined as conning innocent people out of their hard-earned money.  (In some cases the victims of these scams include innocent taxpayers when police employ so-called psychics in crime investigations for fear of being accused of not doing everything possible.

I’m sure some of these people sincerely believe they have some extraordinary power, just like some who work in the media sincerely believe they are journalists doing the work of the people and not just trying to create juicy headlines to sell more airtime, and some politicians sincerely believe they are public servants more interested in the good of the nation than in their own reelection.  These days real journalists and statesmen are rare; real psychics are non-existent.

The second question is:  Where are those consumer protection agencies when we need them?  Obviously, it’s ridiculous to expect government agencies to protect us from our own ignorance and gullibility.  In these days of high velocity, sophisticated sales tactics, it takes critical thinking, a healthy skepticism and the understanding that being open minded does not mean accepting every whacko idea that comes along.

The psychic in question was sentenced to 26 months in prison, ordered to reimburse the woman and fined by the IRS.  Perhaps that will give her time to do a reading or two for herself and enjoy some of the spiritual cleansing and strengthening she was so eager to sell to others.

Effects of Publicity

How are we affected by the news?  Do we just sit and watch, absorb the information and form our own opinions?  The news media hopes this is not the case.  They hope to influence our thinking, and there is some evidence that they are correct.

An older study about the donation habits of Americans is the first example.  This is quoted from the summary.  “Using Internet donations after the 2004 tsunami as a case study, we show that media coverage of disasters has a dramatic impact on donations to relief agencies, with an additional minute of nightly news coverage increasing donations by...13.2% of the average daily donation for the typical relief agency. Similarly, an additional 700-word story in the New York Times or Wall Street Journal raises donations by 18.2% of the daily average.”  At that time social media was far less prevalent.  It is a good bet that Twitter and Facebook has more influence today, possibly even more than the big newspapers.

Another example is parents’ heightened fear of abduction leading them to be worried and overly protective.  It began with pictures of missing kids on milk cartons years ago, making it appear that a relatively rare problem was widespread.  They see reports that almost 466,000 children were reported missing in 2016, not realizing that the category of “missing” includes:  runaway or abandoned, abducted by a family member, miscommunication, premature reporting, or abducted by a stranger.  The greatest concern is the last case, which is by far the least frequent, amounting to less than 2% according to one source or a fraction of 1% (100 per year) according to another.  When you consider that 466,000 represents only 0.6% of all children in the US, these incidents are extremely rare.

The large number of 466,000 and the nation-wide publicity blow the problem out of proportion, which helps sell news and raise donations for agencies dedicated to this cause, but it causes parents to overcompensate.  They restrict their children’s movements and freedom far more than they did 50 or even 25 years ago.  And if they don’t watch their kids every second, busybody neighbors report them to protective services for being negligent.  At one point Rhode Island was considering a bill that would prohibit children from getting off the school bus in the afternoon if there wasn't an adult waiting to walk them home. This would have applied until seventh grade.

Many people object to caged chickens as a cruelty but think nothing of restricting children well beyond their abilities to cope – leading to, among other problems, less independence and less learning.

  

On the news one day last week I heard a report about the success of the Clean Air Act.  It was similar to this on-line NPR report.  “The Clean Air Act is a genuine American success story and one of the most effective tools in U.S. history for protecting public health. It has sharply reduced pollution from automobiles, industrial smokestacks, utility plants, and major sources of toxic chemicals and particulate matter since its passage in 1970. “  The story goes on to tell how it has saved millions of lives and reduced emergency room visits.

The very next day on the same segment of the same news program the headline was that air pollution causes premature deaths in the elderly. “Even short-term exposure to air pollution at levels that are below current air quality standards appeared to increase the risk for death among older people.”

People hearing only the first report would be encouraged; those hearing only the second would be discouraged; others hearing both might not know what to think.

Finally, an enlightening report tells that police officers killed in the line of duty in 2017 approached a 50-year low.  The graph accompanying the original article makes the trend clear.  But with wall-to-wall coverage of every incident, most citizens would think the opposite is true.  Likewise and regardless of what politician and media reporting imply, the violent crime rate in the US is at the lowest point since 1990.

What makes good news is what makes good theater.  It’s too bad this may lead to donations to disasters or causes out of proportion to their seriousness and to fears out of proportion to their dangers.  The important question about the news is not whether it's true, but whether it's meant primarily to inform or to manipulate.

One More Time: Magic Answers

Over the last two entries, I have focused on the tendency for Americans to look for the easy answers and the miracle cures in terms of super-foods and “magic” supplements.  I will cover one more example of weak discipline and critical thinking before turning to other subjects.

A half-page newspaper advertisement for another magical supplement caught my eye last week for a number of reasons.  It was presented to look like a news story and played on the common suspicion of drug companies.  The claims also appeared to be exaggerated.  At the bottom of the page in fainter print it had the typical disclaimer that begins, “These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration, this product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease individual results may vary…”  The presentation reminded me of all those similar ads promising to tell you the secrets that Wall Street, doctors, banks or credit card companies don’t want you to know.  (I saw two similar ads for different miracle products in the same newspaper over the next two days.)

In this one the headlines began “Drug Companies Fear Release of [the product]” with a sub-headline:  “Big Pharma stands to lose billions as doctors' [sic] recommend drug-free ‘health cocktail’ that adjusts and corrects your body's health conditions.”  It doesn't cure anything, but adjusts and corrects?  This sounds fishy to me and very hard to prove.

A paragraph below begins, “some doctors call it ‘the greatest discovery since penicillin’! And their patients call it ‘a miracle’!”  Of course they never specify who those doctors are except for one “top doc” who turns out to be a “company spokesperson.”

This aloe-based product is marketed to replace prescription proto pump inhibitors like Prilosec that reduce stomach acid production to help people with ulcers.  The ad does correctly mention that the FDA warned about problems and side effects with these prescription drugs in the past.

But their product is presented as new and revolutionary, “so powerful it begins to benefit your health the instant you drink it.”  It supposedly helps not only with digestion, but also supports heart health, improves brain function and memory by ensuring “healthy bacteria flows freely to your brain,” optimizes your liver, improves kidney function and delivers calcium to give you "celebrity hair and skin."  (See my comments one week ago on calcium supplements.)

A quick review of WebMD gives some reliable information about aloe, the main ingredient, particularly aloe taken by mouth.  It “can reduce constipation and also cause diarrhea” and may reduce “weight and fat mass in overweight or obese people with diabetes or prediabetes.”  All other listed benefits are for topical application with no mention of those listed in the ad.

They go on to point out that there has been some research but insufficient evidence of benefits for dry socket, cancer, canker sores, dental plaque, diaper rash, dry skin, frostbite, gum disease, hepatitis, high cholesterol, insect repellent, bedsores, dandruff, inflammatory bowel disease, wound healing, epilepsy, asthma, colds, bleeding, depression, glaucoma, vision problems, and several other conditions.  Notice again the absence of any mention of heart health, brain function, liver function or kidney function.

The next section lists warnings and side effects.  The gel is “likely safe when applied to the skin appropriately as a medicine or as a cosmetic” and is “possibly safe when taken by mouth appropriately.”  However, “taking aloe latex by mouth is possibly unsafe at any dose. . .”  Listed as possible side effects of taking it by mouth are:  stomach pain and cramps, diarrhea, kidney problems, blood in the urine, low potassium, muscle weakness, weight loss, and heart disturbances.  In high doses it may be fatal.

It’s strange that the ad lists kidney benefits and heart health while WebMD warns of possible negative side effects in both cases.

I find the whole thing very discouraging because naïve Americans are spending enough money on these products to pay for the development and placement of these ads, production and distribution of the product, company administration, plus company profits.  This applies to the example above plus all the other get-rich-quick and get-well-quick products on the market.  At one time hucksters rode into town in horse drawn wagons selling their cure-all snake oil.  Now they take out newspaper and radio ads, and people seem to be falling for it over and over.

What We Put in Our Mouth

A few days ago, my wife read a news story about the “raw water” movement in California.  It sounded outrageous, especially with the NBC headline:  “‘Raw water’ sound good to you? Then maybe diarrhea does, too.”  Untreated water may contain various harmful bacteria, farm runoff and other chemicals “that can cause long-term health effects, such as kidney and liver damage, nervous system disorders and birth defects.”  As people around the world crave clean drinking water, some Americans think it’s trendy to go back to nature.

I put it aside until I saw this CBS story about teens daring each other to eat laundry detergent.  That makes an interesting comparison to adults following every food trend that comes along.

First a brief summary of the detergent story – the latest social media fad is teens daring each other to put poisonous detergent pods in their mouths.  It’s called the "Tide Pod Challenge."  Those are the same pods government agencies have been recommending parents be very careful about buying, because toddlers and seniors with dementia mistake the colorful pods for candy.  Ten deaths have been reported.  Teens have no excuse and most know better, but at that age peer pressure is a powerful force.

The raw water story inspired me to look for other food trends.  What a surprise!  The search results for “2018 food trends” listed pages of sites.  I chose just a few to see what they held and soon I came to understand that what adults put in their mouths is often influenced by peer pressure as well – even if they too should know better. 

The first one I scanned asked:  “Always looking to be ahead of the curve when it comes to food trends?”  (Talk about pretentious!)  “The National Restaurant Association compiled the data by surveying 700 American Culinary Federation members earlier this year and asking them to rate over 100 items as 2018’s predicted ‘hot trend,’ ‘yesterday’s news,’ or ‘perennial favorite,’ respectively.”  Well, who would want their friends to find out that their food choices were so last year?  This is ridiculous on its face – hot trends, an American Culinary Federation?

But there was more.  Another site informed me:  “In recent years, quinoa, sorghum, teff and buckwheat have been the ‘superfoods’ of choice, but times are changing and other foods are taking the spotlight thanks to their spot-on nutritional content.”  The superfoods of last year are being replaced by the latest food trends that “may include nut oils, maqui berries, chaga mushrooms and tiger nuts.”  Later in the story appears a picture of two cartons of hemp milk, one labeled as a superfood, the other contains Omega 3 – 6, vitamin B12, vitamin D, and is gluten free, soy free, and carrageenan free, carrageenan, derived from seaweed is used for its gelling, thickening, and stabilizing properties.  Apparently we should avoid it like the plague!  You won’t find any of that stuff in a superfood, no matter how natural the seaweed is!

Finally, I ran into a discussion of something called hydrogen water, great for athletes as it promises to boost energy, supply antioxidants, and remove lactic acid.  (Lactic acid is another subject to look up before believing the negative press.  See this in Runner’s World.)  You can order hydrogen water on Amazon.  For $17.99 (with $12.00 shipping) you get 7 pouches holding slightly more than one quart each.   That’s 1.75 gallons of water for only $30!  Better hurry; when I checked, there were only 18 left in stock.  Compare that with tap water, which costs about a quarter of a penny per gallon.

The article goes on:  “Admittedly, the science in this area [of hydrogen water] is weak at best, but we love the clean crisp flavor (and it might have helped to make our hangover a little less intense). If you're thirsty and feeling like the tap water isn't cutting it, give this a go.”  If tap water isn’t cutting it you can also buy a beer at a baseball game for less!  But food trends are not to be approached with logic.

In the end we have teens following trends and adults following trends.  The difference is that the consequences to the teens and the “raw water” crowd may be near-term and very uncomfortable, if not fatal.  For the rest, the consequences are delayed and disconnected.  They wonder why they have to work well into retirement, forgetting that tap water was not good enough or that they have no savings left after throwing away good money on the latest superfood.

In Search of Longer Life

We love to believe that certain products will help us live longer and healthier lives.  The problem is we are often wrong, but continue to spend lots of money on these supposed preventions and cures.

In light of this, the latest research should come as no surprise.  “Calcium and vitamin D supplements may not help prevent bone loss and fractures, according to a new study released Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”  This article goes on to say that in 2016 Americans spent close to $2 billion on these supplements hoping to enjoy the benefit of stronger bones.  In conclusion the researchers remind us that the best way to get nutrients is not through supplements, but through food rich in vitamin D and calcium.  And stronger bones are also promoted by regular exercise.

The part about skipping the supplements and getting vitamins and minerals through healthy eating is standard in much of this scientific health advice, but often ignored.  Taking a pill or two is much easier, and the idea of exercise to promote health just seems like too much work.  The result is $2 billion wasted.

Calling it a waste may seem harsh, but here is a direct quote from WebMD from about 3 weeks ago:  “Seniors are wasting their time and money taking calcium and vitamin D supplements to ward off the brittle bones of old age.”  They are unnecessary and there is little evidence that they work.  But try to tell that to anyone committed to a daily regimen of supplements of any kind and they will resist, saying it works for them or it makes them feel better.

The problem is even greater for those buying homeopathic remedies.  Here is an excerpt from a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) press release from last month with the subtitle “FDA continues to find that some homeopathic drugs are manufactured with active ingredients that can create health risks while delivering no proven medical benefits.”

The press release continues:  “Until relatively recently, homeopathy was a small market for specialized products. Over the last decade, the homeopathic drug market has grown exponentially, resulting in a nearly $3 billion industry that exposes more patients to potential risks associated with the proliferation of unproven, untested products and unsubstantiated health claims.”  The Federal Trade Commission is also cracking down due to the unsubstantiated claims that these substances cure anything.

I don’t think it is a coincidence that the popularity has grown over that last decade when social media began to spread so many false reports about health, miracle cures, and vast conspiracies by the medical profession and insurance companies to keep the truth from the public.  Again I am not being harsh in exposing this information.  Consumer Health Digest puts it even more bluntly:  “Although homeopathic products have no proven effectiveness and their theoretical basis is senseless, a complete ban is not politically feasible.”  Isn’t it a shame that popularity trumps science in this and so many other cases?

These ideas get embedded so deeply in the social consciousness that no amount of persuasion will change habits.  Take for another brief example this from the New York Times a little over a year ago:  “Misconception: Drinking buckets of cranberry juice can cure, and even prevent bladder, infections.”  Yet how many will continue to swear by cranberry juice for those mythical benefits?

There is no fighting it.  Weakness in discipline leads us to rejoice at the thought of an easy answer and weakness in critical thinking leads to the victory of emotion and popular opinion over science.  What’s the problem here?  After all, it’s only $5 billion wasted, and the cranberry juice will at least keep us hydrated.