How many times have you searched for information about a health-related subject and become confused by all of the recommendations and differing views you come across? In fact, I am not sure that you could research any topic without having to address differing and sometimes polar opposite views. Anyone out there ever get confused? Anyone get frustrated? How do you determine who to believe and what to believe? Let me give you some ideas and guidelines to follow.

Guideline 1: You can not make meaningful determinations by a person’s degree.

As a society we have developed a comfort level with medical doctors. So, if we see the initials of M.D. behind a name we immediately tend to put more weight into their opinion. I fully understand this level of confidence if we are talking about a disease state. But, why do we extend this confidence to nutritional advice when medical doctors get exactly ZERO information about the subject in their training? Furthermore, they are CONSTANTLY barraged by the pharmaceutical industry that has a vested interest in painting any natural treatment in a light of danger and ineffectiveness. This creates a foundation of bias from which it is very difficult to break free.

Many authors actually have nutrition degrees. I have a Master’s Degree in Human Nutrition and others may be certified nutritionists or even registered dietitians. Although these degrees are specific to nutrition, they mean little. I can tell you that I only gained two things from my Master’s degree. I was given direction and I attained a degree that people give more weight than they should. What I have learned about nutrition comes from experience and many hours of pretty intense study. You would not believe how many nutritionists stop learning once they get their degree!

Finally, I have met many people and have read a great deal of information from people who, I feel, are spot on but they have no formal degree. Andrew Robbins, the author of Licensed to Kill, is a great example of someone without a formal degree who knows more about nutrition than most health care professionals.

The bottom line: The degree tells you very little about how much faith you should put in any given opinion when it comes to nutrition.

Guideline 2: Evaluate how the person is described?

This evaluation will supply you with very good information about the person giving you an opinion. The rule of thumb is simple. If the person is hyped, expect that the information they give you will also be exaggerated. If the person is “world renowned”, a “top doctor”, “famed”, “well known”, “internationally known” or is a “best selling author” (I am amazed at how many best selling authors are out there!) I can all but guarantee you that they are trying to impress you to eventually sell something. Of course no rule of thumb is absolute, but the authors and health professionals I respect give you a fair description of who they are and what they have done. Most will actually feel uncomfortable being praised for doing something for which they have a passion.

The bottom line: Hype usually equals claim exaggerations.

Guideline 3: Evaluate why the person believes what he/she believes.

It is human nature to want to share our beliefs with others. We freely proclaim what we believe to enlighten others with our knowledge. For example, you may tell me you believe that your neighbor’s son is one of the best basketball players in the U.S. There has to be a reason behind why you would make this claim. Maybe your neighbor told you this and you simply believed him. You might have actually seen this kid play and were impressed. You could have read a newspaper report highlighting his/her abilities. Maybe you evaluate basketball statistics for a living and this led you to the conclusion that this kid is the best in the U.S. My point is that you could believe what you believe because your brother’s friend’s cousin told you or you may have done personal research into the subject. You can imagine that the person who did the research would be able to give you a much more detailed answer as to why they believe what they believe.

Whenever anyone makes a health-related claim, they have come to that conclusion by some means of reasoning. Your task is to determine that reasoning. Do they spell out exactly why they believe what they believe? Or, do they give you what I like to call the quick blow-off answer.

A common example of this is when you ask the question of what kind of multivitamin you should buy. One person tells it makes no difference so you should buy the cheapest you can find because they are all the same and you will only create expensive urine by taking too much. Another person tells you that it makes a big difference. They tell you that cheap vitamins are hard and do not dissolve, have chemicals and colorings that are not good for you, and contain minerals in the form that studies have shown to be the least absorbable. They tell you that good studies have shown that certain people need much higher amounts of vitamins to gain benefit. They offer you evidence to this effect. In this case, you have to determine which person has developed their point of view with the most complete information since they have opposite beliefs.

The bottom line: Does the person offer detailed information to back up why they believe what they believe?

Guideline 4: Evaluate whether the person is COMPLETELY biased for or against something

O.K., let’s be upfront from the very beginning. Every one of us has our bias for or against something. I am no different. What I am cautioning you against is the person who is so completely biased for or against something that they only see their point. These people, many times, give off a “conspiracy-minded” feel to anything opposite of what they claim. Great examples of this are the websites proclaiming that soy is one of the greatest poisons in our food chain. When you read these sites you will get the feeling that the soy industry has conspired to hide all of the evils of soy in order to make money. They back up their claims with numerous research studies leaving you shaking your head in disbelief that soy is even on the market.

My observation from reading these types of completely biased informational sources is that you will notice that they only tell you either the bad or the good, depending upon their bias. The soy sites mentioned above conveniently leave out all of the MANY positive studies showing that soy can indeed have beneficial applications for health. Last month I wrote about hormone replacement therapy. Those completely biased for its use make it sound as if hormone replacement is a glowing light of hope for all women and shove the sinister parts under the rug.

Now, let me stop right here to make something VERY clear! I have most certainly written very negative articles about certain subjects. Some even have the very conspiracy undertone (FDA approval of questionable drugs/chemicals, Pharmaceutical profit motivations) I just talked about. A great example of this is the article I wrote on the artificial sweetener Splenda®. This article will not give you any good aspects of taking this chemical. However, I am not completely biased against the use of this artificial sweetener. In other writings I do acknowledge the benefits of consuming this chemical over sugar, in certain situations. So, after reading the volume of my works you will come to the conclusion that I am not COMPLETELY biased against anything.

The bottom line: If someone is either COMPLETELY for or against something, keep in mind that there are two sides to every story. Get the other side of the story.

Guideline 5: Will the person allow you to challenge their point of view in an open-minded fashion?

I consider myself to be critically open-minded. Thus, I challenge just about everything. I think this drives my wife nuts sometimes. When I challenge someone on their point of view I want to evaluate a number of areas:

1. Will they specifically address the questions I have or will they give me a blow off?
2. Can they give solid reasoning to back up what they believe?
3. Are they willing to reconsider or adjust their position if they get viable information that discredits their point of view?

People who have come to a conclusion in a superficial manner will not be able to answer specific questions or give you solid reasoning for their beliefs. It will become very evident to you that you should be careful in believing what they tell you. Those who form well rounded opinions will be able to answer specific questions and will give you solid reasoning to back up their view. Keep in mind that you may still disagree with someone even if they have considered a number of sources. I have respect for someone with whom I disagree but who at least has been thoughtful in their position.

You are welcome to email me at any time should you have questions about anything I write. I will specifically address your questions, I will give you my reasoning why I believe what I believe, and I will reconsider my position should you enlighten me.

Bottom Line: How a person responds to your opposing view tells you a lot about how they formulated their point of view.

My very strong recommendation is when you become confused or frustrated by differing information that you apply the above guidelines to the person providing the information. This may help you to narrow down which source would be more reliable.