HOW TO RESPOND

This paper first appeared in the Autumn 2021 issue of the 'Skeptical Intelligencer', pp 4-5.

There is currently much discussion in skeptical circles about the publicity given in mainstream media to those promoting irrational ideas, false, discredited and unsupported claims, pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, and the like. Particularly vexatious is the practice of including in the article or presentation opinion provided by 'an expert' or 'skeptic' 'to ensure balance'. How would you respond to this request to ASKE that was received a few weeks ago from a television company ( '…..' indicates material redacted to help preserve anonymity)?

I'm contacting because we're currently working on a video which follows an individual who says her life has been changed since the pandemic, because that's when she found natural healing and crystals. In the video she makes claims that fluoride is purposely put in our water, that the covid vaccine isn't beneficial and ultimately her intention is to turn her back on society and western medicine in order to return to 'mama gaya' (sic) (mother earth).

As a broadcaster we need to balance her points of view and I wondered if you have any skeptics ….. who happen to speak ….. that may be able to help? We'd be looking for someone who would be able to scrutinize alternative medicine and crystal healing and highlight the dangers/ risks it could pose.

My first reaction was to think how I could help this broadcaster locate a suitably qualified person who would be willing to assist. But then (cf. Daniel Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Slow) I decided that a different response was in order. Thus I replied:

'Thank you for your email. You are telling me that there's a woman ….. who believes in the healing power of crystals and other 'natural remedies'; that fluoride is purposely put in our water (it is in some areas of the country-it's called fluoridation and it helps in the prevention of tooth decay), and that there are no benefits to Covid vaccination. I am guessing that her claims about fluoridation relate to a longstanding conspiracy theory that it's a method whereby governments can subdue the population.

'This person is free to believe what she chooses, but I can't understand why, despite the consensus that there little or no evidence to support her pronouncements, they are considered to be of such significance that she is being given the privilege of appearing on television to announce them to the world and to have expert opinion on hand to comment on them. Not only that, publicising claims like these is potentially harmful: thousands of mainly unvaccinated Covid patients are presently occupying hospital beds and in the UK hundreds are dying each week; seriously ill people who would otherwise survive are rejecting the proven remedies of conventional medicine in favour of discredited treatments on sale by the 'alternative medicine' industry; and the benefits of fluoridation for dental and, consequently, general health are being denied to children because of unfounded fears fuelled by conspiracy theorists. (Ten years ago I researched the background to these claims. I spent hours reviewing the evidence, arriving at a balanced set of informed conclusions, and writing it all up in an article that you will find at http://www.mheap.com/Flouride.html. When I had done so, no magazine, newspaper, radio or television company contacted me for an interview or invited me to take part in a public broadcast. I didn't expect them to: my article is boring, unsensational and merely confirms the existing consensus, then and now.)

'I think your programme is misleading, misconceived and unhelpful and I am sure this is the opinion of members of our group and of skeptics generally.'

I was tempted to add 'The nut that squeaks the loudest gets the most grease'-not my words, but those of a woman with mental health problems whom I used to see professionally. But I resisted on the grounds of offensiveness (Get thee behind me Satan!).

I received a reply from the journalist 'addressing my concerns' ('On the topic of crystals and natural healing we hope to include a GP or a young (sic) doctor to comment on the fact that these practices have not been proven by science') but I did not accept the invitation for further discussion.