Science and Lies
Larry Birnbaum, PhD, FASEP, EPC
Department of Exercise Physiology
The College of St. Scholastica
Duluth, MN  55811

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” - Joseph Goebbels

While I have heard the above quote numerous times, I have never been able to verify the original source.  It has been attributed to Joseph Goebbels perhaps more often than others, and there is a record that supports that assertion [1], although the exact quote has been slightly altered.  Regardless, the point of the statement is obvious, and this strategy has been used throughout history by many different entities.  Today, it is used by politicians, businesses, and even scientists.  Perhaps I use the term scientist too loosely.  Ideally, a scientist is one who pursues the truth (i.e., research) in his or her field of expertise in a totally unbiased manner.  Of course, we should pursue ideals that are held in common to be good, but as humans we can never achieve the ideal.  To be human is to be biased.  Therefore, it is critical for scientists to acknowledge their own biases and make a sincere effort to minimize them in their research.

Exercise physiologists are scientists.  Some conduct research while others are clinical practitioners.  Both investigators and practitioners need to read research articles critically.  Generally, it is not difficult to ascertain whether or not the research design is appropriate, provided the design is described adequately.  Methodologies are usually explained in sufficient detail to enable the reader to understand what was done and judge its rigor.  What can be challenging is the data analysis, particularly if one’s background in statistics is weak.  Nonetheless, exercise physiologists should have sufficient understanding of the basic science to determine whether or not the results make sense.  One of the ways we make sense of research results is by comparing them to previous research.  If the results reinforce the findings of previous studies, we are inclined to accept them as valid.  But what if the first study was in essence a lie?  What if the original investigators manipulated the data or research design (e.g., subject selection) to arrive at a preconceived conclusion?  And what if subsequent studies knowingly or unknowingly repeated the same mistake?  The more often the lie is repeated, the more likely it will be accepted as truth.  Even as scientists we tend to believe those we perceive to be experts.  Sometimes it takes as little as one person to initiate a lie that is accepted by peers, especially if he is held in high esteem.  The lie is then perpetuated by colleagues and becomes accepted by the broader community.  An illustrative example might be the development and use of relative risk [2].

Another important consideration is the source of the funding.  If a pharmaceutical corporation or nutritional supplement company funds a study on one of their products, and the investigators conclude that the product is beneficial, an extra level of scrutiny may be in order.  That is not to say that one should automatically consider the results tainted, but an investigator may find it more difficult to conclude that the product does not help people if his livelihood depends significantly on continued funding from that source.  Such a situation may separate true scientists from liars.

This raises an issue that is particularly important to exercise physiologists, namely, nutritional supplements.  Exercise physiologists may be asked by clients if a particular supplement will truly help them lose weight, bulk up, or run faster.  The exercise physiologist cannot begin to answer such a question if she is not thoroughly familiar with the research on the product.  Before addressing the question, she needs to read the research critically, consider it in light of purported benefits and potential adverse effects, and reach her own conclusions.  Even then she should never recommend or advocate use of the product, but only share the research findings with her clients.  If she has concerns about the research, she should explain those concerns to her clients.  She may also caution them about web page testimonials and product claims.

Lies are perpetuated for a number of reasons; none of them are good.  As exercise physiologists, as scientists, we have an obligation to pursue the truth and to tell the truth.  That requires courage and strength.  Exercise physiologists may have to walk away from a job if it requires them to push supplements.  They will be better serving themselves, the profession, and their potential clients by doing so.  Whatever the situation, exercise physiologists need to be well informed critical thinkers and careful consultants so that they do not find themselves guilty of perpetuating a lie.

References

1.  http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels.

2.  Smith, R.L. (1991) The Cholesterol Conspiracy.  St. Louis: W.H. Green.