Being completely devoid of results from strict, randomized, double-blind trials to prove their beliefs, alternative medicine “doctors” cleverly utilize basic logical fallacies to market their snake-oil remedies. Lucky for them, much of the public is ripe for a scam. One of the greatest blunders of the educational system is the total failure to teach critical thinking to both young and old. Many are easy prey for shameless hustlers all too eager to charge a pretty penny for pseudo-scientific remedies. Below are 5 common logical fallacies and how quack doctors deviously implement them for personal gain.
The Confirmation Bias Fallacy
Jim Laidler, MD, an anesthesiologist in Portland, Oregon,
and his wife were devastated when both their sons were diagnosed with autism.
Modern medicine offers little, if any hope for a cure. He admits he came to
believe in alternative medicine treatments out of desperation to see his sons
cured: “I was happier
because we felt like we were doing something right. That’s how the madness
begins. You want to believe that it’s working, so you force yourself to see
results, and silence the scientific part of your brain.”
This is the confirmation bias (also known as a
priori) fallacy - disregarding
contrary evidence and only focusing and believing information that supports
one’s point of view. Smooth-talking alternative medicine “doctors” exploit this
human weakness. Despairing, anxious parents are easily susceptible to this fallacy.
Most doctors are not adequately trained to deliver
devastating news. There is often no social worker to guide parents when they
receive their child’s autism diagnosis. This leaves the door open for desperate
parents to seek other solutions from phony doctors promising miracle cures.
Emily Callahan, clinical psychologist and director of outpatient therapy at the
Virginia Institute of Autism, cautions: “People are looking for a quick,
complete solution, an easy solution. A lot of pseudoscientific interventions
claim to have quick effects, but we never claim to have those.”
Laidler writes about his experience:
“Looking back on my experiences with alternate autism therapies, they
seem almost unreal, like Alice's adventures in Wonderland. Utter nonsense
treated like scientific data, people nodding in sage agreement with blatant
contradictions, and theories made out of thin air and unrelated facts—and all
of it happening, happening right here and now, not in some book. Real people
are being deceived and hurt, and there won't be a happy ending unless enough of
us get together and write one.
“My personal journey through the looking glass has ended. I stepped into
“alternative” medicine up to my neck and waded out again, poorer but wiser. I
now realize that the thing the ‘alternative’ practitioners are really selling
is hope—usually false hope—and hope is a very seductive thing to those who have
lost it. It is really not surprising that people will buy it even when their
better judgment tells them not to do so.”
“Through the Looking Glass: My Involvement with Autism
Quackery” http://www.autism-watch.org/about/bio2.shtml
For the Laidler
family’s complete story see Wired
magazine’s “An Alternative Medicine Believer's Journey
Back to Science” http://www.wired.com/2015/04/alternative-medicine-believers-journey-back-science/
The Novelty Fallacy
Alternative medicine doctors rely on many people’s
preference for the new and shiny. Any fresh, modern, cutting-edge object or
medical “discovery” must surely surpass the outmoded, out-of-date,
anachronistic technology or belief systems of times past. This is the novelty fallacy. Medical tourists who travel abroad for dubious
treatments falsely assume because a treatment is new it must work better than
the old tried-and-true but not guaranteed standard treatments. Many are upset
that their own country is not supporting this new, innovative medical miracle.
They don’t like the risks they choose to take and say things like:
“We need therapies in our own cities and towns. It is
deplorable and inhumane that we must put ourselves in harm’s way.”
“At least China is doing something in the fight
against this awful disease.”
“Basically this is the clinical trial on humans they
won’t do in the west. We are pioneers. We have replaced the mouse model. (Your
welcome, all you naysayer’s out there.)”
http://thewalrus.ca/blinded-by-science/
The False Causation or False Correlation Fallacy
The entire cancer quack industry likes to tout the
irrefutable fact that more people are getting cancer today than ever before. As
a result, this proves that conventional cancer treatments are all one big scam.
This is the false causation or false
correlation fallacy – falsely attributing cause and effect.
Over 60 years ago most people were dying of old age by
age 65. Thanks to advances in modern medicine, today most people are living
well into their 70’s and 80’s. Of course there is more cancer – in the past
people were too dead to get cancer! Just because people live into their 80’s
doesn’t automatically mean they are disease free – their advanced age actually
means more disease susceptibility! This is a false correlation – because there
are more cancer deaths today then all oncologists and hospitals are
perpetrating a global mass-murderous conspiracy. http://www.livescience.com/51425-cancer-rates-decline.html
“Overall, US cancer death rates have declined
20% from their peak in 1991 (215.1 per 100,000 population) to 2009 (173.1 per
100,000 population). Death rates continue to decline for all 4 major cancer
sites (lung, colorectum, breast, and prostate). Over the past 10 years of data
(2000-2009), the largest annual declines in death rates were for chronic
myeloid leukemia (8.4%), cancers of the stomach (3.1%) and colorectum (3.0%),
and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (3.0%). The reduction in overall cancer death rates
since 1990 in men and 1991 in women translates to the avoidance of
approximately 1.18 million deaths from cancer, with 152,900 of these deaths
averted in 2009 alone.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23335087
“The cancer death rate in Canada is going down, resulting
in nearly 100,000 lives saved over the last 20 years (1988 to 2007). Despite
the drop in the death rate, cancer is still the leading cause of death in
Canada …… Declines in death rates were seen in all four major cancers: lung,
colorectal, breast and prostate. Between 1988 and 2007, overall death rates
dropped by 21% in men and 9% in women.” http://www.cancer.ca/en/about-us/for-media/media-releases/national/2012/canadian-cancer-death-rate-down/?region=on
“Acute lymphoblastic leukemia is a bone marrow cancer
that untreated leads to death but with appropriate chemotherapy has an over 90%
cure rate.” https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/cancer-controversial-science-health-news/leukemia-needs-chemotherapy-not-live-enzyme-treatment
Complete cancer statistics: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/document/acspc-042801.pdf
The Appeal to Improper Authority Fallacy
A good example of the appeal to improper authority fallacy is
the attempt of homeopaths to prove their pills work by publishing studies
similar to the one in the August 2015 issue of the journal Multidisciplinary
Respiratory Medicine. Researchers in Italy separated 90 children with ordinary colds.
They gave one group a homeopathic pill and the other group a homeopathic syrup
with an antibiotic. To no one’s surprise, after a few days all the children got
over their colds, which is the course of all normal colds no matter what
medicine is given.
Amazingly, the researchers concluded: "Our data confirms that the homeopathic
treatment in question has potential benefits for cough in children ..." A
genuine, randomized trial would have one group taking the homeopathic product
and the other group taking a placebo or conventional cold medicine. This is basic Science 101 which is even known
by all first year students in any field of study.
How is this an appeal to improper authority fallacy? The
“researchers” attempt to appeal to the high regard given to reputable
scientific journals. The journal Multidisciplinary
Respiratory Medicine is typical of a “predatory open access” publication. The
researchers paid at least $1,940 to get the article published with little or no
scholarly oversight. Some of the characteristics of these journals are:
--- Accepting articles quickly with little or
no peer review or quality control, including hoax and nonsensical papers.
--- Notifying academics of article fees only
after papers are accepted.
--- Aggressively campaigning for academics to
submit articles or serve on editorial boards.
--- Listing academics as members of editorial
boards without their permission and not allowing academics to resign from
editorial boards.
--- Appointing fake academics to editorial
boards.
--- Mimicking the name or web site style of
more established journals.
--- Misleading claims about the publishing
operation, such as a false location.
The Argument from Ignorance Fallacy
Even 60 Minutes
was shocked at the deviousness of this 21st century con-artist. For
$125,000 US this “doctor” promises a cure for several diseases while bilking
desperate people out of their life savings. The argument from ignorance (Argumentum
Ad Ignorantium) fallacy appeals
to the victim’s ignorance on the subject in question - 8 minutes 8 seconds –
10 minutes 15 seconds
An appeal to improper authority
is used by the quack doctor’s sidekick. He attempts to impress 60 Minutes with a University of Texas
medical diploma. The University has no medical school and has never heard of
the “doctor” - 19 minutes 12 seconds - 20 minutes 33 seconds
"60
Minutes" Presents: 21st Century Cons (first segment)
Jerry De Luca is a Christian freelance writer who loves perusing dozens of interesting and informative publications. When he finds any useful info he summarizes it, taking the main points, and creates a (hopefully) helpful blog post.
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Feel free to leave any comments...