I’m not often wrong, but I admit when I make a mistake. I was always aware of pseudoscience littering the internet and permeating our communities. I must admit that I fell for a stereotype of clear-cut pseudoscience camps. Until recently, I thought science-deniers were neatly packaged into two groups as follows:
The right-wing religious pseudo-science pushers
- Climate-change denial
- Evolution denial
- Belief in physical harm caused by abortion
- Statements like Todd Akin’s about pregnancy not resulting from legitimate rape
- Young earth creationism
- Belief that sexual orientation is not innate
- Anti GMO/Genetic modification
- Belief in harm of vaccination
- “Natural-is-better” mentality
- Belief that homeopathy works
- Belief in curing or preventing ailments with “natural”/herbal remedies
I can’t pinpoint why I subscribed to this dichotomous view. Perhaps it came from headlines like, “Are GMOs the Climategate of the Left?” This view changed when Modern Alternative Mama very recently entered my radar. Why? This is a group of very religious, Biblical Christians. Now if you have a moment (I promise it’s worth the “um, what?” factor) go peruse Modern Alternative Mama’s Facebook page. With just a quick glance you’ll find gems like “Fighting the Flu with Essential Oils,” general anti-vaccine propaganda, so-called ionized clay to use as a natural “chemical-free” detoxifying agent, and anti-GMO pro “real food” misinformation. While this is just a small sampling of the plethora of drivel cloaked in credible rhetoric this page touts, these are all beliefs I would have ascribed to the left-wing brand of pseudoscience.
I’ve concluded that all kinds of pseudoscience infiltrate most of society across political and religious lines. So is there a remaining difference? Take again, for example, Modern Alternative Mama. What does the word “alternative” mean? One of the accepted definitions is, “existing or functioning outside the established cultural, social, or economic system.” It boggles my mind how such people can fly in the face of scientific and medical consensus yet follow the word of the Bible. I’m sure the irony won’t be lost on my readers. Evidence unequivocally shows that vaccines and GMOs are safe. Yet this person’s website claims that herd immunity isn’t a good reason to vaccinate, that consuming GMO food causes cancer, and that she “doesn’t believe” in the institution of modern science. At the same time, she and many of her readers subscribe to the belief system that the Bible holds the tenets by which to live. As I’ve stated, I’m not anti-religion by any means, but the inconsistency in following an ancient doctrine while rejecting thousands of studies on GMO safety and vaccine safety cannot go unquestioned.
Hyprocrisy still abounds with left-wing folks berating conservatives who disbelieve in global warming and then hold “Hell No GMO” signs at rallies. No matter the political or religious affiliation, these anti-science bloggers and activists are not only ill-advised, but reckless and dangerous. Make no qualms, this isn’t just benign drivel. This fear-mongering has tangible effects on consumer habits and political trends. As my readers know, I’m vocal on these topics and I’m not planning on stopping any time soon.
Stay tuned for a list of the top woo offenders to avoid when you’re expecting.
Bush cartoon image credit
Monsanto poster image credit