I guess this is really more of a semantic argument; the examples you’ve given aren’t really…
Adam Fisch

I am not stating that one is better or worse, but simply bringing up the fact as to why people are starting to question experts and “scientific studies.” I think this is in part due to mainstream news outlets blindly presenting studies as truth or scientific that are often contradictory and/or not actually scientific and due to the fact that corporations and industries present bias and unscientific information under the label of “science” in order to gain legitimacy. Both are irresponsible, though I guess you think one is far worse.

Further, I am more interested in the so called idea of regimes of truth, or how knowledge or arguments are presented as valid, “truth,” and legitimate and how these regimes are currently being attacked and transformed. I think the media and this article does a fairly poor job of understanding why experts and science are being questioned. Ultimately, it is an attempt to question power, a power that has been seen to exploit others for their own benefit. If one really wants to uphold science and rationale thinking, news needs to stop hiding unscientific and bias claims under the title of science, this means calling out organizations like Mercola but also organizations/institutions that are part of the current power structure (so mainstream news outlets, corporations, politicians, etc.).

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.