WEBVTT - #1956 The Weaponisation Of "Science Tells Us"... - Harps 0:00:01.320 --> 0:00:03.320 I'll get a champions of taps. Who else would it be? 0:00:03.400 --> 0:00:07.200 I hope you're bloody terrific. So I just wrote a post. 0:00:07.200 --> 0:00:13.239 I just read a post on me keyboard. I am 0:00:13.280 --> 0:00:19.480 having regular conversations. I haven't really thought this through to clearly. 0:00:19.600 --> 0:00:21.360 I know what I want to say, where I want 0:00:21.360 --> 0:00:23.560 to go, But if it's a bit stumbley bumbly, fuck it, 0:00:24.480 --> 0:00:27.160 just go with me because I think the ideas and 0:00:27.240 --> 0:00:31.880 I think the subject matter is really relevant and important 0:00:32.000 --> 0:00:37.720 and interesting. And I feel like, so what am I talking? 0:00:37.720 --> 0:00:40.360 But you probably know because you read the post or 0:00:40.400 --> 0:00:43.000 you read the synopsis or the title, So of course 0:00:43.040 --> 0:00:49.080 I'm talking about the weaponization of the term science tells us. 0:00:50.400 --> 0:00:52.320 I feel like, I don't know how you feel, but 0:00:52.400 --> 0:00:55.680 I feel like, in twenty twenty five, we've never fucking 0:00:55.800 --> 0:01:01.680 heard that statement, that cliche, that expression, that's sentence. More often, 0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:06.200 where people to shut something down, or to manipulate someone 0:01:06.319 --> 0:01:11.480 or control someone, or to win an argument or end something, 0:01:11.600 --> 0:01:14.080 they go, well, science tells us. And then when you 0:01:14.120 --> 0:01:18.800 do dig a little deep, you go which science, And 0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:22.240 invariably they don't know which science? And if even if 0:01:22.319 --> 0:01:24.320 I'm trying to be smart ass, here I just think 0:01:24.360 --> 0:01:26.920 that we need to be really clear about what we're 0:01:26.959 --> 0:01:29.199 saying and what we're listening to, and what we give 0:01:29.319 --> 0:01:33.520 our time and energy and focus. Because when someone says 0:01:33.640 --> 0:01:39.319 something to you, even including me, I always say, don't 0:01:40.000 --> 0:01:43.440 don't trust me or believe me just because I say something, 0:01:43.520 --> 0:01:46.280 Go and put it under the microscope. If you think 0:01:46.319 --> 0:01:49.240 what I say is interesting or maybe relevant or even 0:01:49.440 --> 0:01:53.000 wildly mind blowing, still go test it. You still need 0:01:53.040 --> 0:01:56.720 to learn for yourself. You still need to understand things 0:01:56.800 --> 0:02:00.760 and think critically and make decisions and discuss your own 0:02:00.800 --> 0:02:03.960 purpose path through all of that. With that in mind, 0:02:05.440 --> 0:02:09.600 the whole kind of I don't know that the habit 0:02:09.680 --> 0:02:13.120 that seems to be sweeping through social media or the 0:02:14.560 --> 0:02:17.920 regular occurrence of people just not just social media, but 0:02:18.040 --> 0:02:22.240 in conversations and mainstream media, out and about, you know, 0:02:22.320 --> 0:02:26.000 everywhere where people kind of just think that they're going 0:02:26.080 --> 0:02:30.320 to win or prove that they're right by prefacing or 0:02:30.480 --> 0:02:33.800 ending something with you know, science tells us or that 0:02:34.000 --> 0:02:36.720 science well, that's what we know, or that's what the 0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:43.200 research says. But when pressed, people generally can't cite the research. 0:02:43.639 --> 0:02:47.480 People generally can't tell you how many people were in 0:02:47.520 --> 0:02:50.680 the study, Where was the research done, who did the research, 0:02:50.760 --> 0:02:54.760 who funded the research, When was the research. Was it 0:02:54.760 --> 0:02:57.600 done in nineteen seventy four or was it done last week? 0:02:57.720 --> 0:03:01.519 Tell me about the research, tell me about the science. 0:03:02.000 --> 0:03:04.720 And the truth is ninety nine percent? Maybe the truth. 0:03:04.800 --> 0:03:07.400 See that's me making sit up. My feeling is that 0:03:07.520 --> 0:03:10.839 probably around ninety nine percent of people don't actually know 0:03:11.600 --> 0:03:14.280 who did the research, where the research was done, what 0:03:14.400 --> 0:03:18.280 the protocol was, if it was funded, if the researchers 0:03:18.520 --> 0:03:20.760 or the investors in the research, or the funders of 0:03:20.800 --> 0:03:25.520 the research had a particular commercial interest in the outcome. Well, 0:03:25.520 --> 0:03:28.760 of course they do. That's why they fucking fund it. Mostly, 0:03:29.360 --> 0:03:32.880 And so I don't think and this is not me 0:03:33.040 --> 0:03:37.840 disrespecting science. I love science. I'm finishing a science doctorate. 0:03:37.920 --> 0:03:40.720 You know that, I've got another degree in exercise science. 0:03:40.840 --> 0:03:45.880 I love science. But guess what science is flawed. Science 0:03:46.040 --> 0:03:52.760 is not a perfect thing. People do science. People do 0:03:52.880 --> 0:03:56.839 science who have got agendas. People do science who get 0:03:56.880 --> 0:04:02.640 things wrong. People do science who then interpret the data 0:04:02.720 --> 0:04:05.680 the way that they think the data should be interpreted, 0:04:05.760 --> 0:04:09.560 because quite often they might want the data or the 0:04:09.640 --> 0:04:14.320 results to align with their initial hypothesis. So that their theory, 0:04:14.360 --> 0:04:21.920 their idea, their intention has proven correct, because that gives 0:04:21.920 --> 0:04:25.119 them more credibility, makes them feel better about themselves. Of course, 0:04:25.200 --> 0:04:27.760 now am I saying everyone who does science is unethical 0:04:27.839 --> 0:04:30.960 and selfish and not at all, not at all. But 0:04:31.680 --> 0:04:35.040 what I am saying is that we need to be 0:04:35.080 --> 0:04:37.800 more aware and conscious. And you may not be a 0:04:37.880 --> 0:04:43.400 scientific person. I suggest most of my listeners, not particularly 0:04:43.960 --> 0:04:46.440 which is not good or bad, but probably don't have 0:04:46.520 --> 0:04:48.960 a science degree or a science background. I know some 0:04:49.040 --> 0:04:51.800 of you do, some of you don't. Doesn't matter either way, 0:04:51.800 --> 0:04:54.080 and whether or not you have a science background or not, 0:04:54.200 --> 0:05:01.320 the same applies. You know. In twoenty twenty five, science 0:05:02.240 --> 0:05:05.880 tells us like science tells us. That's not just a statement. 0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:09.640 It's not just a statement. It's a sales pitch. It's 0:05:09.680 --> 0:05:16.560 a power play. It's a psychological Jedi mind trick all 0:05:16.680 --> 0:05:22.160 rolled into one, trying to coerce or manipulate or convince 0:05:22.480 --> 0:05:26.800 someone of something. People don't say science tells us to 0:05:26.880 --> 0:05:31.640 invite a conversation. They say it to end a conversation. 0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:38.440 They don't say it to explore complexity and nuance, but 0:05:38.640 --> 0:05:41.960 rather to shut it down. They don't say it to 0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:45.039 illuminate truth, but rather to wear a lab coat of 0:05:45.120 --> 0:05:52.800 credibility while often peddling an ideology, an influence, or even 0:05:53.080 --> 0:05:55.680 to sell you a fucking shake, or to sell you 0:05:55.720 --> 0:05:59.479 a product or a program or a pill. Science tells us, 0:05:59.480 --> 0:06:01.599 Science tells that we need more of this, and I'm 0:06:01.600 --> 0:06:05.760 selling this, and statistics tell us that this. Many people 0:06:05.920 --> 0:06:09.960 are undernourished because they're not having this, or they're whatever. 0:06:10.000 --> 0:06:13.760 It is right. It's like the ultimate mic drop. Science 0:06:13.800 --> 0:06:17.400 tells us this is the best. Therefore I'm right, you're wrong, 0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:22.039 you should do this. Translation, I've outsourced my thinking to 0:06:22.120 --> 0:06:24.240 an article I didn't read, from a study I didn't 0:06:24.240 --> 0:06:29.120 really understand by researchers. I don't know any uni I've 0:06:29.160 --> 0:06:31.520 never heard of. But nonetheless, I'm going to say this thing, 0:06:31.560 --> 0:06:35.479 and it makes me sound credible. It makes me sound smart. Now, 0:06:36.400 --> 0:06:40.840 is everybody who says that that. No, Some people go 0:06:40.960 --> 0:06:43.719 science tells us and they know they've done. That's cool 0:06:43.760 --> 0:06:50.000 and good on them. But I think that many of 0:06:50.080 --> 0:06:53.800 us who are consumers, many of us who are students, 0:06:53.920 --> 0:06:57.280 many of us who are on the journey. It is 0:06:57.400 --> 0:07:02.440 really easy when you want something to be true. You know, 0:07:02.480 --> 0:07:04.880 when you live in an echo chamber of belief or 0:07:04.920 --> 0:07:09.520 idea or ideology or philosophy or behavior. You live in 0:07:09.560 --> 0:07:16.120 an echo chamber that is moving in a certain direction 0:07:16.360 --> 0:07:20.520 or embracing certain like I said, ideas or philosophies, then 0:07:21.120 --> 0:07:24.640 it's very likely that you will pay attention to the 0:07:24.760 --> 0:07:28.920 science in inverted commas that suits your argument. And while 0:07:28.920 --> 0:07:31.520 that is very understandable and I'm not being critical, that 0:07:31.640 --> 0:07:33.880 is part of the human experience. We want to be right. 0:07:33.920 --> 0:07:36.000 We don't want to be wrong. We want to belong 0:07:36.080 --> 0:07:38.040 to a group. Part of the cost of belonging to 0:07:38.120 --> 0:07:40.640 the group is that we all align and conform and 0:07:40.720 --> 0:07:47.080 think the same. But the truth is that science is 0:07:47.120 --> 0:07:52.640 not much of science is not set in stone. It's evolving. 0:07:52.840 --> 0:07:56.320 It's the way that we analyze it and understand it 0:07:56.360 --> 0:08:00.760 and interpret it and test it is dynamic, you know. 0:08:01.000 --> 0:08:06.720 It's if we're being honest, science tells us is often 0:08:06.760 --> 0:08:12.680 almost like a rhetorical sleight of hand to impress people, 0:08:12.760 --> 0:08:16.760 to impress the uninformed, or to manipulate the undecided, or 0:08:16.840 --> 0:08:25.280 to win an argument with confidence and haughty words like 0:08:25.320 --> 0:08:28.400 that word, haughty words not evidence, to sell products that 0:08:28.400 --> 0:08:33.240 wouldn't stand up without the white coat. Cosplay and to 0:08:34.520 --> 0:08:40.360 deceive or manipulate people who trust the word scientific more 0:08:40.400 --> 0:08:45.199 than they do their own gut or intuition or understanding. 0:08:47.000 --> 0:08:51.920 And people use it to control narratives by masking authority 0:08:52.640 --> 0:08:56.600 as objectivity. But the truth is that science is not that. 0:08:56.760 --> 0:09:03.880 Science is not dictatorial. Science is curious, Science is messy sciences. 0:09:03.960 --> 0:09:07.319 Some of science is uncertain and evolving, as I said, 0:09:08.640 --> 0:09:13.280 whereas fake science speak is rigid. It's convenient, and it 0:09:13.400 --> 0:09:18.280 often comes with a call to action or an offer 0:09:18.840 --> 0:09:24.240 or a discount code. So when someone says the science 0:09:24.320 --> 0:09:27.839 tells us we need to pause, We need to go 0:09:28.880 --> 0:09:34.319 what science? Which science? Who did that? Whose interpretation of 0:09:34.360 --> 0:09:37.880 the data? How strong is the evidence? How many people 0:09:37.880 --> 0:09:40.839 were in the study? Did it have ethical approval? Were 0:09:40.840 --> 0:09:43.160 there twelve people in the study? Were there twelve thousand 0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:46.160 people in the study? Is there a conflict of interest? 0:09:46.160 --> 0:09:50.000 Who was financing it? And does it actually apply to me? 0:09:52.240 --> 0:09:57.400 Because in the wrong hands, science really becomes less about 0:09:57.559 --> 0:10:06.400 truth and knowledge and discovery more about disguised persuasion and manipulation. 0:10:10.320 --> 0:10:16.360 When I first started my PhD, I was early days, 0:10:16.400 --> 0:10:19.280 and I'm still not a great academic or researcher. By 0:10:19.320 --> 0:10:22.440 the way, but early days, I mean, you know, most 0:10:22.440 --> 0:10:25.760 of you know what my study is about. It's about 0:10:25.920 --> 0:10:29.680 metaperception and metaacuracy, understanding how people see us. But it 0:10:29.760 --> 0:10:34.839 really insects with all mind stuff, meta meta cognition, thinking 0:10:34.840 --> 0:10:37.960 about thinking, theory of mind, thinking about or understanding or 0:10:38.000 --> 0:10:41.640 having an insight into how other people think. And then metaperception, 0:10:41.800 --> 0:10:44.160 understanding how others see us, and all of that stuff. 0:10:44.160 --> 0:10:46.560 But it's all around mind stuff, and it's all it 0:10:46.600 --> 0:10:51.000 all falls loosely under the banner of social awareness, self awareness, 0:10:51.600 --> 0:10:59.400 situational awareness. And so in the first week also I 0:10:59.400 --> 0:11:01.880 can't remember, but it was very very early days. I 0:11:01.880 --> 0:11:04.480 mean this was twenty nineteen November one I started. So 0:11:04.480 --> 0:11:06.200 I'm going to say in the first week or weeks, 0:11:06.760 --> 0:11:09.960 I decided that I would see what the research, what 0:11:10.040 --> 0:11:13.959 the literature said. Remember, and I'm looking at papers and 0:11:14.000 --> 0:11:18.240 research up to about fifty years old, So from the 0:11:18.320 --> 0:11:25.880 seventies until now, I tried to get a definition of 0:11:26.320 --> 0:11:29.840 or clarity around self awareness. And I thought, what is 0:11:30.600 --> 0:11:32.640 I have my own idea of what self awareness is, 0:11:32.640 --> 0:11:34.840 but what does the science say? What does the science 0:11:34.880 --> 0:11:39.200 say about self awareness? So I had to look in 0:11:39.360 --> 0:11:42.839 a whole bunch of different kind of areas of psychology 0:11:42.880 --> 0:11:48.040 and human behavior, and organizational psych and social psych and 0:11:48.120 --> 0:11:50.920 clinical psych and all the psychs and all the different 0:11:51.040 --> 0:12:00.040 kind of departments or areas that are researched, and I 0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:06.520 reckon in an hour, I found in the science, in 0:12:06.559 --> 0:12:11.559 the science, in the research, in the highest level PhD 0:12:11.720 --> 0:12:17.840 and post doc research, ten definitions, give or take, of 0:12:18.200 --> 0:12:21.400 self awareness, and none of them were the same. There 0:12:21.480 --> 0:12:26.080 was intersecting kind of ideas, and there was some consistency, 0:12:26.160 --> 0:12:31.600 some inconsistency, some familiarity between the definitions. But what was 0:12:31.640 --> 0:12:33.920 an Of course, now I look back and I go 0:12:34.000 --> 0:12:36.040 I was naive to think that there would be one 0:12:36.240 --> 0:12:41.000 unifying kind of definition of self awareness that everyone in 0:12:41.040 --> 0:12:44.160 science and everyone in research, no matter which area of 0:12:44.240 --> 0:12:48.199 research they are in, what area of research they're in, 0:12:48.679 --> 0:12:52.920 everybody uses, Oh, Craig, here's the definition that. Well, of course, 0:12:52.920 --> 0:12:55.800 it doesn't work like that. And so even when we 0:12:55.840 --> 0:12:58.680 look at something which is really fundamental, and all of 0:12:58.760 --> 0:13:00.920 us have an idea, we all have heard the term 0:13:00.960 --> 0:13:04.240 self awareness, we all have a somewhat of an understanding 0:13:04.280 --> 0:13:07.920 of what self awareness is. And even with something as 0:13:09.160 --> 0:13:15.360 common and familiar as that term, the science says different things. 0:13:16.559 --> 0:13:20.960 The science says different things, so you go, well, fuck, 0:13:21.000 --> 0:13:26.280 if we can't even have a total convergence or consensus 0:13:27.040 --> 0:13:32.040 on what the fuck self awareness is, no wonder everything 0:13:32.120 --> 0:13:38.520 else is fucking messy. So you know the the just 0:13:38.679 --> 0:13:43.720 trust the science, that idea, just just trust the science. Well, 0:13:44.559 --> 0:13:47.960 who's fucking science? And by the way, nah, there's a 0:13:47.960 --> 0:13:52.679 big fat nah, like, listen to the science, but make 0:13:52.720 --> 0:13:55.680 sure it's science. Make sure or read the science, but 0:13:55.720 --> 0:13:58.920 make sure it's science. Make sure that it's not someone 0:13:58.920 --> 0:14:05.280 else's story about someone else's research, or someone else's idea 0:14:05.360 --> 0:14:08.880 of someone else's research. And by the time you get it, 0:14:08.880 --> 0:14:13.040 it's fifteenth hand and it's not science at all. It's 0:14:13.120 --> 0:14:17.280 a story about something that that person is fifteen steps 0:14:17.400 --> 0:14:24.120 away from what started as research ended up fifteen versions 0:14:24.200 --> 0:14:27.400 later as something else, with the person still telling us 0:14:28.200 --> 0:14:32.400 this is what the science says. So we need we 0:14:32.480 --> 0:14:34.760 need to keep in mind a few things that I 0:14:34.800 --> 0:14:38.160 want to share with you, so one in a particular 0:14:38.280 --> 0:14:44.440 order of importance. So trust the science needs an asterisk 0:14:44.640 --> 0:14:53.680 because science evolves. So what's true today? We go, well, 0:14:53.720 --> 0:14:56.440 this is scientifically valid today, but tomorrow it might not 0:14:56.560 --> 0:15:00.680 be because it might be partially or totally disproven, and 0:15:00.720 --> 0:15:04.000 that's not a flaw, that's actually a strength of science. 0:15:05.160 --> 0:15:10.200 But it also means that we shouldn't treat our current 0:15:10.480 --> 0:15:17.040 findings as gospel, as unequivocal as we well, we might 0:15:17.160 --> 0:15:20.440 find out. We might find out one day that this 0:15:20.520 --> 0:15:22.840 is this is partially true, but there's more to it 0:15:22.880 --> 0:15:27.800 than we originally thought. As we tend to, we tend to. 0:15:27.880 --> 0:15:30.000 I guess there are some areas of science if we're 0:15:30.000 --> 0:15:33.160 talking about physics and so on. But even like when 0:15:33.160 --> 0:15:35.920 we think about what we used to go, oh, this 0:15:35.960 --> 0:15:38.360 is how the brain works. Even twenty years ago, people 0:15:38.320 --> 0:15:42.960 are like no, Like that was hard science, that was neuroscience. 0:15:43.000 --> 0:15:45.160 There was like this is what the brain does, this 0:15:45.200 --> 0:15:47.000 is what it doesn't do, this is how it works. 0:15:47.040 --> 0:15:49.280 Now in twenty five we're going fark on hell, hands 0:15:49.280 --> 0:15:51.960 in the air, emoji, who knew that the brain does 0:15:52.040 --> 0:15:54.880 all this other shit as well? And by the way, 0:15:55.200 --> 0:15:59.400 have you heard about the gut biome? Oh my god, right, 0:15:59.520 --> 0:16:05.000 what was science around how our gut now microbiome worked 0:16:05.560 --> 0:16:08.960 twenty years ago is completely different now, And it's not 0:16:09.080 --> 0:16:12.920 because anyone had bad intentions necessarily. Twenty years ago, But 0:16:13.080 --> 0:16:16.200 now a light's been turned on more research, more funding, 0:16:16.320 --> 0:16:20.200 more understanding, more awareness, and what we currently know about 0:16:20.240 --> 0:16:23.440 the brain and the gut, biome and the human body 0:16:23.480 --> 0:16:27.800 broadly speaking, and physiology broadly speaking, and medicines and dare 0:16:27.840 --> 0:16:31.680 I say it, even fucking vaccines right what we currently 0:16:31.880 --> 0:16:36.000 think to be absolute science. Some of that may be 0:16:36.240 --> 0:16:39.640 much of that in fifty years or even five years, 0:16:39.920 --> 0:16:43.120 but definitely in fifty years, twenty years, people will look 0:16:43.160 --> 0:16:45.640 back and go, what the fuck were those dummies thinking? 0:16:46.600 --> 0:16:49.400 What were they fucking thinking? Now that's people who are 0:16:49.400 --> 0:16:53.160 currently running around beating their chest and pointing their finger 0:16:54.280 --> 0:16:58.560 and telling the world that the science says this. Science 0:16:58.640 --> 0:17:03.800 is important, Science matters, Science is crucial. But we need 0:17:03.880 --> 0:17:08.400 to we need to also be open minded and aware 0:17:08.640 --> 0:17:13.440 and understanding and humble in the way that we research 0:17:13.600 --> 0:17:19.080 and talk and think. Knowing that much of what and 0:17:19.160 --> 0:17:22.240 I've said this before, but wind the clock back two 0:17:22.359 --> 0:17:25.080 hundred years and all of the stuff or much of 0:17:25.119 --> 0:17:27.879 the stuff that we know and do and understand today 0:17:27.920 --> 0:17:31.879 with science and research and technology and medicine, it would 0:17:31.880 --> 0:17:37.720 have it would have been completely fucking in their minds 0:17:37.760 --> 0:17:45.640 two hundred years ago, impossible, not like not improbable, impossible, inconceivable, 0:17:46.400 --> 0:17:50.119 inconceivable that I can be sitting in my office today 0:17:50.280 --> 0:17:53.760 talking to you, and then you have a device and 0:17:53.800 --> 0:17:57.880 tomorrow you're listening to me. You've got this little thing 0:17:57.920 --> 0:18:01.120 in your ear and you're hearing me, and you're being 0:18:01.200 --> 0:18:04.199 inspired or confused or educated or informed or whatever the 0:18:04.200 --> 0:18:07.399 fuck you're being by me. Well, that can't happen. But 0:18:07.520 --> 0:18:11.520 it happens, right because as technology and science and understanding 0:18:11.520 --> 0:18:15.960 and researching all of these things evolve, there now understanding 0:18:16.040 --> 0:18:19.879 of what is possible, what is right, what humans have 0:18:20.000 --> 0:18:24.160 the potential to do, be create, It changes, It changes, 0:18:24.760 --> 0:18:31.680 So science evolves, understanding evolves. Number two why we shouldn't 0:18:31.680 --> 0:18:37.199 trust the science. Cherry picking is like rampant people often 0:18:37.320 --> 0:18:42.240 cite a study or part of a study that suits 0:18:42.280 --> 0:18:46.320 their agenda while ignoring the full body of evidence or 0:18:46.320 --> 0:18:50.879 contradictory findings. I remember years ago reading two books simultaneously. 0:18:51.920 --> 0:18:54.720 I think one was called from Memory. This is a 0:18:54.720 --> 0:18:56.880 long time ago. It was about two thousand, so twenty 0:18:56.920 --> 0:19:01.840 five years ago, fucking you fuck. One was called protein Power. 0:19:01.960 --> 0:19:05.040 I think that's what it was called. And I forget 0:19:05.040 --> 0:19:08.080 the other one. But essentially I back in the old days, 0:19:08.119 --> 0:19:10.239 I was often reading two or three books at once, right, 0:19:10.280 --> 0:19:12.639 i'd have a book work, I'd have a book at home. 0:19:13.320 --> 0:19:19.320 I remember on the same day reading something in the 0:19:19.400 --> 0:19:22.520 first book Protein Power, and something in the second book, 0:19:23.440 --> 0:19:31.639 which basically these two books had almost diametrically opposed viewpoints 0:19:32.240 --> 0:19:38.320 or science. And I remember reading one saying essentially, I 0:19:38.359 --> 0:19:40.720 think we need two to two point five grams of 0:19:40.760 --> 0:19:43.159 protein per kilo of body weight or something like that. 0:19:43.240 --> 0:19:46.560 I can't exactly remember what, and then reading later in 0:19:46.600 --> 0:19:50.840 the day in this other book that essentially the opposite 0:19:51.480 --> 0:19:55.000 or very very different ideas or recommendations or science. And 0:19:55.040 --> 0:19:57.720 then when I went to the back of the book, 0:19:57.720 --> 0:20:01.040 they both were references, they both had site, they're both referenced, 0:20:01.080 --> 0:20:03.280 they both had citations. I went into the back of 0:20:03.280 --> 0:20:05.560 the book and I went and I found the research. 0:20:06.280 --> 0:20:10.040 I'm like, wow, both of these things that these authors 0:20:10.040 --> 0:20:14.000 are saying are very different. Firstly, they're talking about the 0:20:14.040 --> 0:20:18.239 same thing but with completely different science, and both of 0:20:18.560 --> 0:20:23.440 their claims are backed with science. And that was one 0:20:23.440 --> 0:20:27.520 of the first times for me as a young scientist 0:20:27.720 --> 0:20:32.199 and trainer and want to be researcher and understander of 0:20:32.359 --> 0:20:36.200 stuff that I went ah, it's like somebody pulled back 0:20:36.240 --> 0:20:38.760 a curtain because I was probably a little bit in. 0:20:38.840 --> 0:20:42.000 The science says that, So that's what it is. Just 0:20:42.119 --> 0:20:44.760 like for a long time, and you've heard this way 0:20:44.760 --> 0:20:46.719 too many times, but it doesn't go away and it 0:20:46.720 --> 0:20:50.600 doesn't stop being true. I taught the food pyramid for 0:20:50.920 --> 0:20:53.320 a decade or more, maybe two decades, I don't know, 0:20:53.440 --> 0:20:56.840 way too fucking long, because I believe the science and 0:20:56.880 --> 0:20:59.240 the science was, well, this is the best way to eat. 0:21:00.320 --> 0:21:02.240 You know, there's been lots of work and research done 0:21:02.280 --> 0:21:06.600 on this, and blah blah blah bah and high high carbohydrate, 0:21:06.760 --> 0:21:11.960 low fat, you know, high sugar at times. You know, 0:21:12.040 --> 0:21:13.719 a lot of this and a little of that, and 0:21:13.960 --> 0:21:16.680 have it in this order and have this much of that. 0:21:16.040 --> 0:21:18.560 That that's the way to eat. And by the way, 0:21:18.600 --> 0:21:20.479 we know it's the way to eat because the science 0:21:20.520 --> 0:21:24.760 tells us. Now in twenty twenty five, we know different, 0:21:25.320 --> 0:21:28.000 we know different, and maybe in two thousand and thirty 0:21:28.000 --> 0:21:31.119 five that there will be I'm almost certain there'll be 0:21:31.160 --> 0:21:34.680 a change in thinking or a change in understanding or awareness, 0:21:34.760 --> 0:21:40.000 or there will be new data or new interpretations of data. Okay, 0:21:40.480 --> 0:21:44.159 Idea number three around this trusting the science you know 0:21:44.600 --> 0:21:52.240 carefully is is the space between correlation and causation. And 0:21:53.240 --> 0:21:59.960 so causation is obviously if I do this, then that happened. 0:22:00.760 --> 0:22:05.560 So I cause that if I if I jump out 0:22:05.600 --> 0:22:09.679 the window now and I jump onto the concrete and 0:22:09.720 --> 0:22:12.399 I'm upper floor and in my sixty year old body, I 0:22:12.560 --> 0:22:15.320 land in my bare feet, well I'm probably going to 0:22:15.359 --> 0:22:17.560 break an ankle or create a stress fracture, you know. 0:22:17.600 --> 0:22:19.959 So that's I did this thing and I created this outcome. 0:22:20.000 --> 0:22:23.960 That's causation. Correlation is most of you know, this of course, 0:22:24.040 --> 0:22:27.159 is where two things might be linked. They might be 0:22:27.240 --> 0:22:31.320 related or associated, but it doesn't mean that one causes 0:22:31.359 --> 0:22:35.840 the other. But what a lot of people will do 0:22:36.119 --> 0:22:41.760 in the interests of convincing people, or selling people, or 0:22:41.800 --> 0:22:47.320 coercing or manipulating people, or let's be honest, bullshitting deceiving people, 0:22:48.000 --> 0:22:51.760 is that they will use something which might be correlated, 0:22:52.840 --> 0:22:56.880 but instead of talking about correlation, they will talk about causation. 0:22:57.080 --> 0:23:01.159 They will say, people who do this up in this state, 0:23:02.040 --> 0:23:05.080 inferring that if you do that, like if you don't 0:23:05.080 --> 0:23:07.280 need enough of this, then this then you will have 0:23:07.800 --> 0:23:13.080 low bone density. Well, maybe there's a correlation, but maybe 0:23:13.240 --> 0:23:16.680 low bone density is about twenty six variables, not the 0:23:16.760 --> 0:23:20.480 one single one that you're talking about. So we need 0:23:20.520 --> 0:23:24.479 to be really mindful of and careful of understanding the 0:23:24.560 --> 0:23:30.600 space between causation and correlation. Number four on our list 0:23:30.680 --> 0:23:38.160 is scientific literacy varies, and so often people who are 0:23:38.240 --> 0:23:43.399 talking about stuff, or even people who are analyzing research, 0:23:44.760 --> 0:23:47.520 lack the I need to be careful here, but the 0:23:47.560 --> 0:23:52.800 training I guess to evaluate to evaluate research quality, so 0:23:53.960 --> 0:23:59.080 often dodgy or poorly designed studies can be used to 0:23:59.320 --> 0:24:04.080 justify claims. I remember, so there was a I won't 0:24:04.160 --> 0:24:07.639 say what it is, but this this is interesting. The 0:24:07.720 --> 0:24:10.479 other day I saw a product which is for old people. 0:24:11.640 --> 0:24:13.840 I mean old people, I mean people in their eighties 0:24:13.880 --> 0:24:17.160 and beyond. And it was a it was a product, 0:24:17.640 --> 0:24:22.800 it was a food supplement, and it said this increases 0:24:22.920 --> 0:24:28.359 muscle mass by something like two to three percent in 0:24:28.440 --> 0:24:34.639 eight weeks. Increases And I'm like, well, what what so 0:24:36.520 --> 0:24:41.119 drinking something builds muscle And I'm thinking, what about all 0:24:41.119 --> 0:24:44.639 the other variables? And so I went down the whole 0:24:44.800 --> 0:24:48.119 chat GPT and Claude rabbit hole trying to find the 0:24:48.400 --> 0:24:52.520 science behind that claim. And it was a and was 0:24:52.600 --> 0:25:00.200 there any research? Oh my god, like was the research it? 0:25:00.200 --> 0:25:06.960 It was so dodgy, it was so it was so 0:25:07.280 --> 0:25:13.639 inadequate for what we would call scientifically valid research and 0:25:13.800 --> 0:25:20.800 data and interpretation, you know, of the data. And if 0:25:21.200 --> 0:25:23.119 ten out of ten is great science, this was a 0:25:23.160 --> 0:25:26.720 one out of ten research thing. There were very few 0:25:26.760 --> 0:25:30.359 people involved in the study most scientific studies, depending on 0:25:30.400 --> 0:25:32.880 the kind of study. But we want at the bare minimum, 0:25:32.920 --> 0:25:35.560 we want one hundred people involved in research if we're 0:25:35.560 --> 0:25:38.640 going to be using humans in our research to make 0:25:38.680 --> 0:25:43.760 it somewhat valid. Hopefully more, but you know, so we 0:25:43.880 --> 0:25:49.600 just need to be careful of and aware of the 0:25:49.640 --> 0:25:53.360 size of the research or the number of participants in research. 0:25:53.400 --> 0:25:56.159 Who did it, where it was done, and it was 0:25:56.200 --> 0:26:00.720 an academic institution or was it Brian at Hisloody Personal 0:26:00.760 --> 0:26:03.359 Training Center in Bundua shout out to Brian. I wonder 0:26:03.359 --> 0:26:05.399 if there is a Brian who has a pet center 0:26:05.400 --> 0:26:08.720 in Bundua or Scott doesn't matter who it was. But 0:26:08.960 --> 0:26:12.000 you know, what I'm saying Number five is that science 0:26:12.080 --> 0:26:15.480 is often used as a weapon, right And I spoke 0:26:15.520 --> 0:26:21.560 about that before, where people weaponize these things to win 0:26:21.840 --> 0:26:27.439 basically to win to shut down a conversation or to 0:26:28.080 --> 0:26:33.080 shut down any other kind of thinking or perspective. And 0:26:33.160 --> 0:26:36.200 part of that I think is well, obviously because they win, 0:26:36.240 --> 0:26:38.520 they want to control. They want to win, control, manipulate. 0:26:38.920 --> 0:26:43.920 And also you find that with some people, their science, 0:26:44.359 --> 0:26:47.960 like what they think, what they espouse, what they preach, 0:26:48.640 --> 0:26:52.560 is very intertwined with their identity. Now, if you have 0:26:52.640 --> 0:26:59.479 a scientific perspective or viewpoint that is strong, and you 0:26:59.560 --> 0:27:02.960 are a big advocate for that, then your identity, your 0:27:03.040 --> 0:27:05.600 sense of self and confidence and who you are and 0:27:05.640 --> 0:27:09.480 what you're teaching and how you're perceived is intertwined with that. Well, 0:27:10.359 --> 0:27:17.199 when a particular scientific viewpoint is intertwined with your identity, 0:27:17.320 --> 0:27:22.280 then that makes you pretty much unteachable. That makes you 0:27:22.480 --> 0:27:27.280 pretty much unteachable when it comes to unlearning and relearning 0:27:27.520 --> 0:27:32.840 should something new or different or better arise on the 0:27:32.920 --> 0:27:45.040 scientific horizon. But in truth, real science encourages critical thinking. 0:27:46.280 --> 0:27:49.800 It encourages us to consider the fact that maybe we 0:27:49.920 --> 0:27:54.440 got it wrong, that maybe our protocol wasn't awesome, that 0:27:55.680 --> 0:28:02.040 perhaps we're partly right but also partly wrong. And my 0:28:02.160 --> 0:28:07.600 experience as an academic and a pro academic is that 0:28:07.880 --> 0:28:14.360 I have consistently got things gotten, consistently gotten things. I've 0:28:14.400 --> 0:28:18.200 consistently got things wrong. Then I've got so many fuck 0:28:18.240 --> 0:28:21.800 on things wrong. I have consistently gotten things wrong. This 0:28:21.840 --> 0:28:23.600