First of all, the author sells a book about vitamins being bad, so he's probably not being objective about it.
I think you are reversing the cause and effect here. You assume that because he is releasing a book on this topic, therefore his opinion has been molded to fit the book. But you should be asking where the opinion behind the book came from originally.
Meanwhile, the reverse can also be true - the author, a highly credentialed doctor, started out objective on the topic and after years of research has come to the conclusion that he advocates in his article and book.
The focus here on "being objective" is a bit odd - not every issue has two sides that are both equally correct. The fact that someone has done all the research and looked at years of studies and has arrived firm conclusion does not automatically make him or her an unfair observer.
In fact, that's not even bias! Bias is refusing to consider any other viewpoint even with evidence.
I do agree with you though that the article would be better if it was more clear about the dosages in the studies. It's advice comes off as "vitamins are dangerous" rather than "megadoses of vitamins are dangerous".
I think you are reversing the cause and effect here. You assume that because he is releasing a book on this topic, therefore his opinion has been molded to fit the book. But you should be asking where the opinion behind the book came from originally.
Meanwhile, the reverse can also be true - the author, a highly credentialed doctor, started out objective on the topic and after years of research has come to the conclusion that he advocates in his article and book.
The focus here on "being objective" is a bit odd - not every issue has two sides that are both equally correct. The fact that someone has done all the research and looked at years of studies and has arrived firm conclusion does not automatically make him or her an unfair observer.
In fact, that's not even bias! Bias is refusing to consider any other viewpoint even with evidence.
I do agree with you though that the article would be better if it was more clear about the dosages in the studies. It's advice comes off as "vitamins are dangerous" rather than "megadoses of vitamins are dangerous".
reply