False Dichotomies
The Boston Globe ran a reasonably decent article on anti-aging supplements last week, called “Time in a Bottle.” There were, of course, the usual caveats about supplements being unregulated, and the usual experts making harrumphing noises about how consumers should be skeptical, etc. etc., but the author, Kay Lazar, gave the subject a more even-handed treatment than many mainstream writers do.
One of the experts she consulted, however, used an argument that I’ve seen many times before, but is worth calling attention to, as it’s one that’s pretty typical of “knee-jerk” skeptics – people who automatically take a negative stance on ideas or products they consider unorthodox. Here’s what it looks like:
The AARP Bulletin, the monthly magazine for the 40-million-member organization that caters to those 50 and older, refuses ads for products that promise benefits not backed by empirical research, said Susan Crowley, the magazine’s executive editor. “We encourage people to embrace a healthy lifestyle rather than antiaging products which can be expensive, harmful and not regulated,” Crowley said.
It’s the false dichotomy: “a healthy lifestyle” vs. “antiaging products.” Is there any reason why one cannot embrace a healthy lifestyle AND make use of anti-aging products? The two are not mutually exclusive, after all, and it’s a leap of illogic to suggest that they are.
I understand the desire to bring claims for certain products down to Earth: this is something I do myself. For example, in my review of a supplement called “Phytoberry” – I cast doubt on the manufacturer’s claim that a serving was the equivalent of 6 – 8 servings of fruit per day, which implies it’s a replacement for consuming fruits/veggies: a claim that the (limited) data the company supplies simply does not support. This doesn’t make Phytoberry a “bad” supplement, per se, as it’s made from fruit extracts and also contains some added, isolated phytonutrients known to be beneficial to health (resveratrol, quercetin and lycopene). My point was simply a positive application of the same principle: if you’re going to use such a supplement, it should be “eat fruits and vegetables” AND “take Phytoberry” – not “OR.”
It goes without saying that trying to put things in perspective is a more challenging task, and is tough to render in “soundbite” form, but it can be done. And if you’re in a position of influence, such as Susan Crowley is, you have a responsibility to try, IMHO.
Supplements are exactly that: “supplements” – that is, nutrients and compounds you take IN ADDITION TO health-promoting lifestyle changes. To take an obvious example, fat burners don’t work particularly well in the absence of a reduced calorie diet and exercise program. Likewise, anti-aging supplements alone won’t reverse the detrimental changes wrought by an unhealthy lifestyle. Rather than presenting false dichotomies, various experts would do better to frame their advice in realistic terms. Supplements may not be panaceas, but they do have their uses.
