use of Junk Science by websites
Junk Science is used by a variety of people and websites to skew opinion or push agendas. The information from these sites is usually considered incorrect or biased to fit the group’s objectives and goals. Junk science can be identified by looking for accompanying evidence or facts that support the claims being made on a selected article. Most sites use science to attract clients and customers, especially site advertising health, beauty, or slimming products. The information which is not supported by evidence is usually misleading and can cause fatal health effects to the targeted audience. Consumption of alcohol has had controversial discussions with some websites indicating that drinking a glass of wine a day can increase the lifespan of individuals. However, these claims have been bashed by other similar sites like the guardian.
The article by the guardian ‘’Extra glass of wine a day ‘will shorten your life by 30 minutes’’ To begin with, the article’s title is crafted in a way that catches the reader’s interest, especially people with drinking habits. The article does not indicate the qualifications of the author in the topic of discussion; besides, the author is also not listed. Moreover, the website does not indicate the sponsor of the company. The site is also being used for advertisements, as illustrated at the top and the ad pop-ups on the page. The site has supported its claims with evidence from a study published in the Lancet medical journal. The journal, however, besides being peer-reviewed, has not been fully credited and verified by the American council of science and health; thus, the claims are not fully admissible. What is more, the site does not provide a list of reliable sources for the reader’s verification and further study.
Besides, the study does not offer any further or alternative explanation to explain the fundamental causes of cardiovascular diseases or the reason people drink every day, the information on these critical points is not sufficient. Furthermore, there is no actual data to prove that life is shortened by thirty minutes for every glass of wine; what the article does is explain the effects, particularly long term effects of alcohol consumption.
The information provided is appealing to readers, and without a closer look, anyone would believe the claims made. While the information is not validated, some facts have a clear basis and appeal to our general knowledge of the dangers of alcohol consumption. The article highlighted that 100grams of alcohol increases some types of cardiovascular diseases like a stroke but omitted that the risk of a heart attack decreases. The author left out the other part that was contradicting the topic of the article to achieve the specific effect they wanted on their readers.
To sum up, the article can be categorized as junk science based on the lack of valid supporting evidence, the omission of critical data and information from the illustrated findings, and a missing author’s profile. Junk science is increasingly resulting in the spread of wrong information, which might cause serious health consequences on the general firmly public using such materials. Peer reviews on articles should be more established, and media houses should cross-check information before feeding it to the public. Besides, students should consider using academic articles that are reliable and accurate for any form of research to avoid having inconsistent findings and conclusions.