Junk Science

What is Junk Science?

This is the term used to describe scientific data, research, or analysis that may be spurious (non-related) or fraudulent. Junk science is different from other types of non-science in that it is typically motivated by greed and active, willful proliferation rather than benign word of mouth. Junk science can typically be defined by its origins, motivations, and dangers.

Origins

Junk Science typically is a result of bad studies and a misinterpretation of data/results or misrepresentation of data/results. The analysis of the data and research is also typically filled with Bias. Instances where the authors are looking for a specific answer as opposed to trying to prove themselves or others wrong.

Motivations

Junk Science can also be traced back to sources of funding such as corporate lobbyists, media agents, political organizations, or business groups such as food companies (Creators of the FDA Food Pyramid with a Distinct Emphasis on Milk) These groups are usually motivated by Profit and the pushing of an Agenda.

Dangers

The dangers of Junk Science are large. Due to its ability to mimic accurate science, it spreads misinformation and ignorance. In the medical realm, it can lead to patients choosing treatments that don't work at best, or cause Harm at worst. Fad diets and other trends can cause severe reactions within people's bodies. For example, people becoming active proponents of eating Tide-Pods is within the realm of dangerous possibility due to Junk Science.

Examples of Junk Science

Vaccines Cause Autism

Summary: A research article published by Dr. Andrew Wakefield in the Lancet reviewed an MMR vaccine in the 1980s and "discovered" a link to autism.
Why it's Junk: Wakefield was funded by attorneys seeking to file lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers. Furthermore, no peers could replicate Wakefield's findings. Finally, Wakefield was stripped of his ability to practice medicine due to his "Callous disregard" for his child patients during his research.
Dangerous Effects: This example of Junk Science caused a huge spike in vaccine hesitancy which in turn resulted in the rise of growing measles infections, to such an extent that a measles outbreak in the 2010s caused dozens of deaths in children.

AIDS Is a Gay Disease

Summary: The prevalence of AIDS in the LGBT+ community caused people to believe that being near LGBT+ would be enough to catch HIV/AIDS.
Why it's Junk: This belief disregards other methods of transfer such as blood transfusions and needles. It also ignores the fact that most AIDS cases now occur in heterosexual people.
Dangerous Effects: This example of Junk Science caused alienation between the LGTB+ community and the larger society. Some groups even acted to defund AIDS organizations in an effort to "punish" the community when in fact more research and aid need to be given out to the people afflicted by this disease.

Big Agriculture Designs What You Eat

Summary: In a case of conspiracists being right, when the Federal government established dietary guidelines for American adults and children, the people in charge of those designs were representatives of major Agricultural organizations such as Kellog's, General Mill's, etc.
Why it's Junk: Nobody needs 16 pints of milk a day. In other words. the design of the Food Plate and MyPlate were heavily influenced by profit motives from food lobbies rather than health motives.
Dangerous Effects: By tampering with and influencing American diets, this piece of Junk Science is partially responsible for the obesity epidemic. Additionally, by proving conspiracy theorists right, this piece of Junk Science also serves to increase fringe thinkers and distrust in the Federal Government and the standards it imposes.

Ivermectin and Joe Rogan

Summary: Ivermectin, a veterinary medication primarily used for the treatment of worms and other parasites in livestock animals, was promoted as a treatment for COVID-19 on a popular podcast hosted by celebrity Joe Rogan. This contributed to a significant number of people consuming an unproven medication.
Why it's Junk: Ivermectin does have a human use, but is taken in a different form and dosage, and is not an antiviral. COVID-19 Ivermectin Fact Sheet.
Dangerous Effects: Increase in vaccine hesitancy in a time when it cannot be afforded due to the high number of COVID-19-related deaths.

Chocolate Diets and Fad Diets

Summary: A study by science journalist John Bohannon was created by using intentionally flawed methodologies and was heavily promoted via the internet to show that eating chocolate can act as a weight-loss supplement. Even though the purpose of this study was to show the dangers of media-hyped headlines and fad diets, millions of people are thought to now believe that chocolate can aid in weight loss.
Why it's Junk: The intentionally false study had only 15 participants and had no scientific backing.
Dangerous Effects: Consuming large amounts of chocolate or eating chocolate daily could potentially lead to weight gain or other harmful consequences due to its high caloric concentration.

Nutritional Benefits of Cereals

Summary: Corn Flakes was originally created by John and Will Kellogg while working in their Battle Creek Sanitarium in Chicago in 1893. The bland flavor was supposed to discourage immoral "passions" that could lead to insanity and was later marketed heavily to increase sales for the company.
Why it's Junk: Developed with bias by Kellogg's in order to sell more cereals. The Kellogg brothers were heavily influenced by religious ideologies and there is no scientific evidence that connects their understanding of immorality with psychological abnormalities.
Dangerous Effects: The obesity epidemic continues to grow in part because too many people eat sugar-laden and nutritionally deficient cereals rather than a healthier, nutritionally dense breakfast.

Testosterone Therapy leads to Prostate Cancer

- Summary: A research article published by Huggins et. al (1941) concluded that an increase of testosterone through testosterone therapy leads to or increases the rate of prostate cancer in men.
- Why it's Junk: Huggins' study was based on a sample size of three men, one of which ended up dropping out of the study, a second who was chemically castrated before the study (had no testosterone at all), and the reported findings were based on a single subject whose findings were indecipherable.
- Dangerous Effects: A lack of medical study reviews and reproduction can lead to false medical claims and impede patients from receiving appropriate care for many decades.

What to Watch Out for:

Junk Science can usually be identified by a few patterns:

The use of phrases like: “They don’t want you to know”
Using some authority figure such as doctors, special titles, government-sounding names as a way for you to trust their claims
Messaging that makes someone feel special or as if they ca be part of the in-group
Commonly found on social media; if it's viral it's probably not peer reviewed
Preying on societal fears (wanting lighter skin, wanting weight loss, wanting better teeth or posture, etc.)
Marketing that appeals to many people or targeted ads; Real science typically doesn’t have a good marketing team and comes off as boring or dry to most people.

This List isn't exhaustive and there are sure to be many other ways to tell Junk Science apart from Good Science.

What You (and Your Students) Need to Know:

While you can typically identify Junk Science based on some common patterns, there are other things that you should keep an eye out for:

Junk Science can almost always be found by the motives of the authors: Always look for a motive. Usually profit or votes.
Take the time to learn how science is actually done in the modern era:

Science takes time. It takes time to set up procedures, gather materials, gather participants narrow down controls and bias and a huge host of other variables that must be accounted for.
Changing beliefs over time is common in science. There are many reasons why a beliefs could change over time in science. A difference in approach, new data sets or any other reason is enough for beliefs to change. For example, using antibiotics immediately vs taking a wait and see approach. The latter is more common nowadays due to the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance in bacteria.
Opposing views might have something valuable to offer. Good Science needs informed dissenting opinions to be pushed forward and correct for any inconsistencies.

Possible Ways to Teach this Topic:

A future lesson plan on this topic could cover any of the following ideas but could cover much more:

Changing beliefs over time
A comparison of junk science to good science
Deep diving into the history of an article for author motivations
How junk science could lead to misleading, harmful, or dangerous medical practices

Lesson Plans:

The following are links to lessons relating to Junk Science:

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse