Jan. 4, 2005

Media Overdose on Vitamin 'E' (Excess)

What do Howard Dean, Dan Rather and Johns Hopkins University have in common? Beyond their dwindling reserves of "prestige," which is surely one of the more inflated forms of social currency, these three groups symbolize the mainstream media's collapse during the past year. For 2004 deserves remembrance for many reasons: the stories journalists blatantly misreported - from allegations about George W. Bush to outright lies concerning Democratic supremacy to distortions about basic scientific fact - mark the last twelve months as a period of gross error and wrongful collusion. But surely the worst story to emerge from this media meltdown is a study by Johns Hopkins about the dangers of vitamin E, a report that - amidst the sheer totality of words that confront people each day, like a verbal tsunami of immense proportions - reads like a page from a highly controversial magazine. The report's questionable methodology and wrongly characterized findings, which include allegations about an increased risk of death and general safety concerns, are just plain wrong.

Indeed, my first reaction to these events is dismay. How could a school of this caliber - an institution replete with a generous endowment, esteemed faculty and journalistic praise - bend before the accumulated weight of rampant speculation? (Please understand the gravity of this situation: Because it is a research university of serious importance, and by virtue of its highly influential medical school, Johns Hopkins is not another run-of-the-mill outpost, but a leading arbiter - rightly or wrongly - of scientific opinion. Yet, opinion is a form of personal expression, not certifiable fact, and thus limited by the biases, feelings and beliefs of its author.) These findings are wrong but not shocking; even the powerful make mistakes, despite the evidence before them.

I protest these results - mistaken conclusions about a slightly increased risk of mortality - because I dislike the volatility of conjecture. That is, I know the great danger posed by the marriage of fear and public power: the long history of religious and political suffering - which is an unwelcome birthright shared by my spiritual brethren - is the byproduct of impatience and hatred, an impulsive embrace of convenience over common sense. (A personal confession: As someone who suffers from Crohn's Disease, I value the relief vitamin E provides; it is an antioxidant that prevents cellular damage and scarring. And, based upon my behavior as a scrupulous consumer, I do not write these words with an unrealistic notion of scientific fact; I do not expect vitamin E to cure my ailments, but I nonetheless appreciate its rewards as a supplement that reduces inflammation and promotes healing.)

By mischaracterizing and misreporting the findings, combined with the exclusion of larger factual studies, Johns Hopkins and the news media commit a serious error. The ultimate casualty - notwithstanding the weakening of objective analysis - is the American consumer. For individuals must make decisions based upon reason and deliberative judgment, not emotion or prejudice. But this study, which bears the imprint of a prestigious university (and its reputational strength among magazine editors nationwide), is a serious false alarm, an action that creates widespread panic. In truth, the vast majority of scientists support the continued use of vitamin E as an effective supplement: its benefits include reduced risk of heart disease, lowered rates of several types of cancer, and delayed progression of Alzheimer's disease. People who already use vitamin E should not disrupt their medical regimen, since the overwhelming amount of data about this issue is positive.

Science is not a political plaything, an object for academics to distort or journalists to manipulate. Accuracy must remain the dominant force within the medical community, not personal advantage or professional gain. The challenge for the public is to remain steadfast, a veritable rock within the sea of media hysteria. As this new year begins, however, truth will reemerge; and consumers will reject unreliable or patently false information. In the meantime, we should all become even more judicious about the news we receive.

JWR contributor Lewis A. Fein is a writer and Internet entrepreneur in Los Angeles. Comment by clicking here.