We shouldn't take expert advice at face value

steddyeddy · 26-12-2015 02:25AM #1

Dr. Oz, an American talkshow host was recently mentioned in research from the University of Alberta as peddling false scientific information.

Now to be fair he's a TV doctor and this should be expected. The problem is some people see the abbreviations such as "Dr." they tend to accept it. Dr.Oz is a cardiologist but he's not a nutritionist . He shouldn't be giving out medical advice about supplements.

I think people should learn to question experts more. Scientifically there is no such thing as an expert so you should always question why someone is telling you something.

Is there any other "expert" advice you think is misleading? The other one that gets me relates to drinking during pregnancy. We seem to have some doctors telling people a few glasses of wine is OK.

Science says there is no safe level of alcohol for a fetus.

There is often a mismatch between what science knows and people believe.

I don't mean there you shouldn't trust your doctor but I do think we should always question what the media experts tell us. There are maverick doctors out there such as Dr.Oz or Dr Wakefield who give advice to the general public that is at odds with the scientific community.

Del2005 · 26-12-2015 02:27AM

I believe the person who told me not to eat yellow snow.

KomradeBishop · 26-12-2015 02:30AM

Yea given that pretty much everyone has Google at their disposal, there's not much excuse for just taking an experts word for it anymore - you get people presenting the 'experts' qualifications as trumping your own, but so many people with 'qualifications' are just charlatans (Ireland has a fairly high degree of woo-merchants), and even people with reputable credentials, can sometimes be the type of person that is susceptible to taking-on/perpetuating nonsense, so should always have advice double-checked/verified.

You don't need any qualifications to Google something a bit, and double check the veracity of something

It's kind of an important life-skill to develop those critical thinking abilities as well, which unfortunately the vast majority of people don't seem to be very sharp at.

Senna · 26-12-2015 02:33AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You don't need any qualifications to Google something a bit, and double check the veracity of something It's kind of an important life-skill to develop those critical thinking abilities as well, which unfortunately the vast majority of people don't seem to be very sharp at.

Then it goes to the other extreme, people Google everything, they cant make a decision without seeing what someone else things first.
How's about use your brain first and Google second.

Earthhorse · 26-12-2015 02:34AM

Yes we should. Trust me, I'm an expert.

johnnyskeleton · 26-12-2015 02:35AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Yea given that pretty much everyone has Google at their disposal, there's not much excuse for just taking an experts word for it anymore - you get people presenting the 'experts' qualifications as trumping your own, but so many people with 'qualifications' are just charlatans (Ireland has a fairly high degree of woo-merchants), and even people with reputable credentials, can sometimes be the type of person that is susceptible to taking-on/perpetuating nonsense, so should always have advice double-checked/verified.

You don't need any qualifications to Google something a bit, and double check the veracity of something It's kind of an important life-skill to develop those critical thinking abilities as well, which unfortunately the vast majority of people don't seem to be very sharp at.

You dont need any qualifications to put misleading information on a website and pay google to advertise your site either.

The benefit of professionals is that their reputation is their livelihood so they need to ensure they are trusted and reliable i.e. they have an incentive to get it right that random internet people dont.

They also have insurance policies so if a doctor misdiagnoses you you could sue but if you took your medical advice from the internet youre probably out of luck!

PARlance · 26-12-2015 02:38AM

I'm no expert, no.

steddyeddy · 26-12-2015 02:38AM

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You dont need any qualifications to put misleading information on a website and pay google to advertise your site either.

The benefit of professionals is that their reputation is their livelihood so they need to ensure they are trusted and reliable i.e. they have an incentive to get it right that random internet people dont.

They also have insurance policies so if a doctor misdiagnoses you you could sue but if you took your medical advice from the internet youre probably out of luck!

But that's an argument of authority I.e he's a doctor who doesn't want to be sued therefore I should trust their advice.

steddyeddy · 26-12-2015 02:47AM

The biggest one that scientists are trying to stamp out is the advice some doctors give their pregnant clients "one or two glasses of wine won't or might not hurt".

This is in complete disagreement with science yet people still peddle it. Why?

KomradeBishop · 26-12-2015 03:02AM

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You dont need any qualifications to put misleading information on a website and pay google to advertise your site either.

The benefit of professionals is that their reputation is their livelihood so they need to ensure they are trusted and reliable i.e. they have an incentive to get it right that random internet people dont.

They also have insurance policies so if a doctor misdiagnoses you you could sue but if you took your medical advice from the internet youre probably out of luck!

The point though, is if you have a solid base of critical thinking abilities, you have all the tools you need at your disposal, for checking the veracity of pretty much any kind of information.

People always seem to mistake this somehow, with just blindly trusting stuff found on the Internet. It's just about vetting sources mostly.

To be honest, 'professional' qualifications only count as a starting point for checking the veracity of what someone says - in almost all professions, money can make 'professionals' spout nonsense, for their own gain - the potential for conflicts of interest are rife, in most industries, so it's just not smart to trust by default.

Graces7 · 26-12-2015 06:44AM

There is or was a website called " Trust me I'm a Doctor." meaning the opposite. I never trust any doctor frankly. Lost three decades of viable happy productive life to a misdiagnosis and damaging treatment and question and check everything now, with support groups etc; google is grand for checking drugs etc. You will never get an apology as that apparently lays them open to law suits if they admit any liability. I used to say I would trust them with a broken bone but looking at my deformed wrist after they messed a simple fracture up two years ago... and they stick together; kick one and they all limp..Met one honest one in all the years and he set my medical records straight so I was free to leave the UK with a clean start.

sink · 26-12-2015 06:58AM

Think from first principles. It's hard, so may be too much trouble.

sink · 26-12-2015 07:02AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

The point though, is if you have a solid base of critical thinking abilities, you have all the tools you need at your disposal, for checking the veracity of pretty much any kind of information.

People always seem to mistake this somehow, with just blindly trusting stuff found on the Internet. It's just about vetting sources mostly.

To be honest, 'professional' qualifications only count as a starting point for checking the veracity of what someone says - in almost all professions, money can make 'professionals' spout nonsense, for their own gain - the potential for conflicts of interest are rife, in most industries, so it's just not smart to trust by default.

Ain't nobody got time for that

sink · 26-12-2015 07:07AM

Hive mind is the only way forward.

sink · 26-12-2015 07:07AM

We love you Rick.

gctest50 · 26-12-2015 07:27AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

............

There is often a mismatch between what science knows and people believe.

it's all made up anyway :P

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”

the groutch · 26-12-2015 09:36AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_6u4c-BfEk

Oryx · 26-12-2015 09:39AM

steddyeddy wrote: »

The biggest one that scientists are trying to stamp out is the advice some doctors give their pregnant clients "one or two glasses of wine won't or might not hurt".

This is in complete disagreement with science yet people still peddle it. Why?

Youre doing exactly what this thread is about. Quoting vague 'scientists' on something definite and expecting it to be taken at face value. What science are you talking about? What doctors peddle the bad advice? (Im not saying I disagee with what youre saying, but ya still got to ask where the facts come from. Are they valid?)

Wibbs · 26-12-2015 10:16AM

gctest50 wrote: »

it's all made up anyway :P

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of the New England Journal of Medicine”

The Lancet reported similar recently. Industry pressure and the rush to publish means a lot of nonsense gets through.

biko · 26-12-2015 10:51AM

I'm not an expert but I'm opinionated*

*every boards user ever.

CelticRambler · 26-12-2015 10:54AM

Definition of an expert: someone who learns more and more about less and less until he knows everything there is to know about feck all. :cool:

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Yea given that pretty much everyone has Google at their disposal, there's not much excuse for just taking an experts word for it anymore ...

... which would be fine, except that Google's algorithm is set up to give you the results you want to find. So the more you look for (e.g.) "safe level of alcohol when pregnant" the more you'll find articles promoting "safe" levels. It's not just advertising they're tailoring to you and your lifestyle, but information too.

Chaos Marine · 26-12-2015 10:56AM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

*snip*(Ireland has a fairly high degree of woo-merchants)*snip*

You mean the Catholic church?

KomradeBishop · 26-12-2015 12:59PM

CelticRambler wrote: »

... which would be fine, except that Google's algorithm is set up to give you the results you want to find. So the more you look for (e.g.) "safe level of alcohol when pregnant" the more you'll find articles promoting "safe" levels. It's not just advertising they're tailoring to you and your lifestyle, but information too.

Google hasn't got a monopoly on your ability to think for yourself and use critical thinking to evaluate the quality of sources.

It doesn't matter how many articles Google gives you, advocating a certain point of view - the whole point of using critical thinking to evaluate your sources and seek out conflicting views, is that you use that so you can identify all bad sources fairly quickly - regardless of whether Google disproportionately throws bad ones at you - so that you can slowly whittle down the noise/garbage/nonsense, and can get closer to true high quality sources.

Really - what is so difficult about Googling for e.g. sources supporting a point of view (e.g. "drinking while pregnant is ok in moderation"), and then Googling for sources supporting the opposite point of view ("drinking while pregnant is never ok") - and then using critical thinking to gradually evaluate the quality of arguments/evidence/sources on both sides, until you finally whittle down the debate to the sources with the most solid evidence?

It takes time - but that's the way to properly learn anything. Never to just 'trust the experts' - develop your critical thinking skills, and then trust your own intelligence and ability to research instead (while always being open to the possibility of having made a mistake and to re-evaluating the debate).

steddyeddy · 26-12-2015 01:01PM

I'm not saying don't trust your doctor. I'm saying there's a lot of information being peddled by experts that is pseudoscience and the abbreviations Dr in front of your name don't make you an expert.

foxy farmer · 26-12-2015 02:02PM

Dr Oz. Celebrity doctor.
Came to prominence through being featured highly on Oprah Winfrey shows.
Let him spout away. Just more crap that will be contradicted in the future.

Graces7 · 26-12-2015 02:13PM

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm not saying don't trust your doctor. I'm saying there's a lot of information being peddled by experts that is pseudoscience and the abbreviations Dr in front of your name don't make you an expert.

I am advising caution with drs, even your own. Lost count of meds prescribed that are contrainidcated with what you are already taking. Sometimes the pharmacy spots this and checks it. After I broke my wrist, every time I went to OPD the dr prescribed something different. One new painkiller was so hard on the stomach you had to take meds to protect your insides a few hours before the pain meds. Crazy..they loitered a long time in my bathroom cabinet. My body, my life, my responsibility.

Herb Powell · 26-12-2015 02:36PM

The fact of the matter, lads, is that doctors (real ones, at least) know more than anyone who hasn't gone through the rigourous study and training that they have, and should be trusted above anyone else.

We can all point out past instances where the doctors were wrong, but at any given time, medical professionals are the authority. The average person, thanks to internet echo chambers, has been given an inflated sense of intelligence, importance, and pretty much any other bad thing you can think of. Aside from exceptional geniuses, the average person knows fucck all about medicine.

I agree with your main point OP, that you should be sure anyone you are taking medical advice from is a real doctor, but some people seem to be missing that. There's some real dangerous anti-intellectual stuff being said, and it's how we ended up with the anti-vaccine nonsense and a whole host of other problems.

This is only being made worse by the internet with every idiot thinking they know better than the doctors.

Graces7 · 26-12-2015 02:51PM

Herb Powell wrote: »

The fact of the matter, lads, is that doctors (real ones, at least) know more than anyone who hasn't gone through the rigourous study and training that they have, and should be trusted above anyone else.

We can all point out past instances where the doctors were wrong, but at any given time, medical professionals are the authority. The average person, thanks to internet echo chambers, has been given an inflated sense of intelligence, importance, and pretty much any other bad thing you can think of. Aside from exceptional geniuses, the average person knows fucck all about medicine.

I agree with your main point OP, that you should be sure anyone you are taking medical advice from is a real doctor, but some people seem to be missing that. There's some real dangerous anti-intellectual stuff being said, and it's how we ended up with the anti-vaccine nonsense and a whole host of other problems.

This is only being made worse by the internet with every idiot thinking they know better than the doctors.

Gee; they got you brainwashed well and truly. The most dangerous advice I was given for 30 years was from drs. They each believed what the one before said. Got it so badly wrong over 30 years. had I not learned truth for myself and stopped taking wrong and damaging drugs I would be dead or locked up in an institution. I learned truth how? From support groups online. Drs are only human. Last year I got dropped off my drs list. I had made a VALIDATED complaint against a colleague re a piece of grossly unprofessional behaviour in my home during a consultation. There was a witness and I got a written apology. Interesting thing them was that is swiftly accumulated SIX medical cards as they played pass the parcel..I do know my illness better than the drs and I am far from being an idiot thank you! PS I trust the anti vaccine knowledge also and no child of mine would ever have been vaccinated...I will not take any drug prescribed until and unless I have cleared it thoroughly ie read carefully the drug firm literature. checked with support groups etc etc. My body, my life, my responsibility.

Herb Powell · 26-12-2015 03:05PM

Graces7 wrote: »

Gee; they got you brainwashed well and truly. The most dangerous advice I was given for 30 years was from drs. They each believed what the one before said. Got it so badly wrong over 30 years. had I not learned truth for myself and stopped taking wrong and damaging drugs I would be dead or locked up in an institution. I learned truth how? From support groups online. Drs are only human. Last year I got dropped off my drs list. I had made a VALIDATED complaint against a colleague re a piece of grossly unprofessional behaviour in my home during a consultation. There was a witness and I got a written apology. Interesting thing them was that is swiftly accumulated SIX medical cards as they played pass the parcel..I do know my illness better than the drs and I am far from being an idiot thank you! PS I trust the anti vaccine knowledge also and no child of mine would ever have been vaccinated...I will not take any drug prescribed until and unless I have cleared it thoroughly ie read carefully the drug firm literature. checked with support groups etc etc. My body, my life, my responsibility.

This is exactly the kind of bullshhit I'm talking about. Thank you for the example.

By the way, in the case of vaccines, it's not just "your body, your life". If you refuse to vaccinate yourself or your children and then go and participate in society, you are directly responsible in resurrecting diseases that we had under control. Perhaps even facilitating resistant strains. Again, thanks for that.

Your bad experience does not trump existing medical knowledge, and no amount of crying "brainwashed!" (very convenient, isn't it?) is going to change that.

steddyeddy · 26-12-2015 03:33PM

Herb Powell wrote: »

This is exactly the kind of bullshhit I'm talking about. Thank you for the example.

By the way, in the case of vaccines, it's not just "your body, your life". If you refuse to vaccinate yourself or your children and then go and participate in society, you are directly responsible in resurrecting diseases that we had under control. Perhaps even facilitating resistant strains. Again, thanks for that.

Your bad experience does not trump existing medical knowledge, and no amount of crying "brainwashed!" (very convenient, isn't it?) is going to change that.

But you're referring to a phenomenon I'm talking about Herb. Some doctors are mavericks who give out advice at odds with the scientific community. It was a doctor who initiated the anti-vaccine movement. People believed him because he was a doctor.

26-12-2015 03:35PM

A Dr may not have all the answers or may have personal bias at play, like any other person. A Dr is far more likely to have the expertise and ability to interpret a persons symptoms than a search engine though. Contrary to popular opinion, they usually manage to learn something during their many, many years of training and study.

Dr Google isn't always the best choice for a first or second opinion.

We shouldn't take expert advice at face value

Comments