Too much faith that is not backed with research and facts can be harmful to the patients and the
providers reputation. It is true that advances in modern medicine such as antibiotics and vaccines
have increased trust and faith in medical science, but it is important for patients to do their own
research and decide what is best for their own health journey and what doctor is best for them
too. Most patients do not research their doctor’s safety records, training, or experience in the field
nor do they research vaccine or medication side effects; they simply decide off the specialty, the
trust in their provider and the convenience of location. Some medical science is not backed with
research or fact as proof that some of the medications or vaccines would not be harmful to every
individual, as the FDA can approve experimental drugs. For example, “Each year, the FDA’s Center
for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) approves a wide range of new drugs and biological
products: Some of these products have never been used in clinical practice.” (FDA). This is
alarming to think about as it can result in potential harmful side effects, unethical practices, and
fraud. “In order for competent and innovative knowledge exploration to take place in parallel with
conventional data gathering, it is important that creative and skilled reflection will count as
original research in medical academe.” (Getz). Doctors can gather a bunch of data in research, but
a collection of data is not necessarily science. Every person is different; therefore, treatments and
prevention should depend on the individual and their health history.
Do we blindly trust everything our doctor tells us just because they have an MD or DO after their
name? Trust between a patient and a physician is very important when providing care. A healthy
doctor-patient relationship does not simply entail good bedside manners and responsible office
management on the part of the doctor. It also requires that patients come to the relationship
educated about their doctors, their illnesses, and their treatment (Chen, 2008). Today with the
development of medical science the average life has significantly increased. Medical technology
has improved humans to be healthier and to live longer. The measures are by controlling the
diseases which are contagious, developing antibiotics, and alternative treatments. The
advancement in medical science has provided cures for a wide array of diseases to the point that
many people believe maintaining good health is adhering to a medication regimen or undergoing
treatments that can substitute for a healthy lifestyle. b
Early screening and interventions can be costly and are they truly necessary? Doctors have gotten
into the habit of ordering huge amounts of laboratory tests and treating the results while ignoring
what is best for the patient. Therefore, the faith in medical science can be attributed to age,
uninformed patients, and dependency on the medical profession
Medical science is the study of how the human body works. Including the basic biology, anatomy,
physiology, pathology, biochemistry, microbiology, molecular biology, and genetics.
With advancements in medical science humans today now have a longer average life span of 78
compared to two hundred years ago which was 35-year-old. Public health measures such as the
control of infectious diseases, development of antibiotics, clean water and modern sanitation have
allowed humans to live longer healthier lives.
However, the question is with the exponential growth of medical science advancements, are we
paying too much faith in it? This includes processes such as stem cell therapy, cloning and organ
transplants that MAY harm patients.
Unnecessary treatment and procedures are a topic of discussion. For example, doctors who order
unnecessary exams (MRI), latest surgical procedures, prescribing expensive drugs to charge higher
fees, cosmetic procedures such as liposuction and cosmetic surgery. These modern procedures can
cause financial problems as well as dangerous health complications that CAN arise many years
later.
There also comes issues with fraud and unethical practices. For example, medical researchers can
be tempted to fake research results or use unethical means to gather research data. These
practices can cause patient harm if undetected due to flawed research. There have been cases
where Scientists been stripped of their title and post for unethical medical practices and ethics.
b b b b b b b b b b On the other hand, faith in medical science can be justified. Infectious diseases are under
control, such as malaria, smallpox, and the plague have killed millions in the past. Medical science
has found ways to combat the diseases and destroyed the carriers of such bacteria and viruses
and even created vaccines and antibiotics to fight illness. As mentioned earlier, people are living
longer healthier lives, with infant mortality being decreased significantly.
Almost half of all Americans believe that life began no more than 10,000 years ago (Diethelm,
Pascal and Martin, 2012). As a result, humans, and dinosaurs would coexist, rendering carbon-
dating invalid and erasing all evidence of evolution. Innovators are not on their own. Even after it
was discovered that the research data used to make the connection had been falsified,
approximately one-fifth of Americans believe vaccines can cause autism. Despite numerous studies
linking the effects of climate change CO2 emissions, according to a 2010 Gallop poll, half of the US
population believes human actions have nothing to do with climate change (Rettig, 2012). People
who do not believe in science can think rationally—no germ of disease, no evolution or genetic
code, no pointless heat storage. But how does this happen among those who believe in scientific
principles, the scientific method, and most of its conclusions? Psychologists refer to this as
persistent belief, and it is a well-studied phenomenon. We are all susceptible to it to some extent,
but some people are more susceptible than others.
Modern psychological scientific studies show that the population's level of trust will rise or fall,
which is a measure of everyone's attitude toward the patient to serve all individuals and groups in
the medical profession. One can set proof standards that science cannot meet, such as I believe
climate change is the result of human action when I see evidence that the Earth has never
experienced a temperature increase before. "The conscious part of science begins with an act of
faith, the ancient Greek belief that the natural world operates through mechanisms that we can
comprehend, even if they are initially hidden from view" (Pollack, 2013). Alternatively, one can
look for experts who support irrational beliefs through pseudoscience, misinterpretations,
misrepresentations, and logical fallacies, such as if smoking truly causes lung cancer, then every
smoker gets lung cancer. It is not about science in the end. It is about avoiding the stress of failing
to recognize the possibility of regret or shame for making a mistake. So, for the sake of cognitive
harmony, otherwise rational people believe vaccines can cause autism, that human actions have
nothing to do with climate change, that smoking the drug did not cause cancer, and that the trial
was, apparently, incorrect.
I consider myself a strong believer in both science and medicine. I have great respect for the
people who dedicate their lives to making us healthier and allowing for us to live longer. However,
I think that it is highly important to vet those we are listening to, especially if something does not
sound quite right, but also because it is the right thing to do. A particularly large issue in
healthcare now is the misinformation presented by individuals with positional authority, speaking
out of turn or in a self-serving fashion.
b b b b b b b b b b b b Consider someone like Andrew Wakefield, who, in 1998 published a case series with 12
other colleagues suggesting that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine had the
potential to predispose the child recipients to autism (Rao & Andrade, 2011). Though the
publishing has since been retracted and Wakefield discredited, the damage persists to this day.
While Wakefield et al. used flawed research methods, that has little impact on those with a
confirmation bias, simply looking for an opinion, any opinion, to match their own and cement their
beliefs firmly in place.
b b b b b b b b b b b b The healthcare industry holds numerous intelligent, respectable, upstanding members.
However, there are a few bad apples that spread the seeds of doubt upon an unwitting public.
TikTok has been fraught with “doctors” who, upon further digging, are nurses, or “nurses” who,
upon further digging, work in dietary medicine, spreading misinformation to the masses. A study
by Germani and Biller-Andorno (2021) has indicated that individuals who identify as “anti-vax”
tweet less but engage in deeper discussions than their counterparts and have a stronger ability to
pull in social media celebrities into the conversations. These behaviours are concerning,
particularly during these intense times we are experiencing all over the worlds, but also because
they will likely be trusted by those in doubt or looking for confirmation bias.
b b b b b b b b b b b b We also have medical professionals speaking out of turn. A family friend was on the
fence about receiving the newest vaccine because he has had heart issues in the past; he
ultimately obtained the Johnson & Johnson vaccine to visit his daughter living in England.
However, when it came time to get his booster, he expressed greater hesitation. Though his
primary care provider and his cardiologist have both recommended he obtain his booster, another
friend, a former cardiologist who lost his license to practice over a decade ago, strongly
recommended against it and apparently presented quite the compelling argument. The family
friend is now refusing to obtain his booster, despite planning a trip to visit his 100-year-old mother
with a compromised immune system in her assisted living facility.
b b b b b b b b b b b b There are well-known articles reporting medical professionals losing or surrendering their
licenses due to similar preaching. Thomas Cowan surrendered his medical license to the medical
board in California, who was known for spreading misinformation connecting the COVID-19
pandemic to 5G cellular internet (Ostrov, 2021). Steven Arthur LaTulippe had his license to
practice medicine revoked by the Oregon Medical Board in 2021 after claiming that patients could
experience carbon dioxide poisoning while wearing face masks (Ellis, 2021). These are just a few
cases of influential healthcare providers being able to use their positional authority to influence
the unsuspecting public with misinformation, which can be one of many potential implications of
having too much faith in medical science.
References
Ellis, R. (2021, September 21). Doctor who claimed masks hurt health loses license. WebMD.
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210920/doctor-who-claimed-masks-hurt-health-loses-
license
Germani, F., & Biller-Andorno, N. (2021). The anti-vaccination infodemic on social media: A
behavioural analysis. PLoS ONE, 16(3). https://doi-
org.ezproxy.snhu.edu/10.1371/journal.pone.0247642
Ostrov, B. F. (2021, February 5). Conspiracy theory doctor surrenders medical license. Cal Matters.
https://calmatters.org/health/2021/02/conspiracy-theory-doctor-surrenders-medical-license/
Rao, T. S. S., & Andrade, C. (2011). The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction,
and fraud. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 53(2), 95-96. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.82529
Diethelm, Pascal and Martin McKee, October 31, 2012. "Negativeism: what is it and how should
scientists respond?" European Journal of Public Health. Episode 19, Issue 1. P. 2-4. 2009. via Euro
Pub. http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/content/19/1/2.full
Pollack, R. E. (2013). The faith of biology and the biology of faith: order, meaning, and free will in
modern medical science. Columbia University Press.
Rettig, Jessica, November 2, 2012, "Few and fewer Americans see climate change as a man-made
threat." US News & World Report. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/on-
energy/2011/08/26/fewer-americans-see-climate-change-a -Threat -caused-by-people
College Affairs. (2019, August 25th). “People are placing too much faith in medical science.” Do
you Agree?” Retrieved from https://collegeaffairsblog.wordpress.com/2019/08/25/people-are-
placing-too-much-faith-in-medical-science-do-you-agree/
Chen, P. (2008) New York Times Do Patients Trust Doctors Too Much? b
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/health/18chen.html
College Affairs. (2019). People are Placing Too Much Faith in Medical Science. Do You Agree? b
https://collegeaffairsblog.wordpress.com/2019/08/25/people-are-placing-too-much-faith-in-
medical-science-do-you-agree/
Getz, L., Kirkengen, A., Hetlevik, I. (2008). Too much doing and too little thinking in medical
science! Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care. Retrieved from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3406649/
FDA. (Jan. 06, 2022) New Drugs at FDA: CDER’s New Molecular Entities and New Therapeutic
Biological Products. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved from:
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/development-approval-process-drugs/new-drugs-fda-cders-new-
molecular-entities-and-new-therapeutic-biological-products
Chen, P. W., M.D. (Dec. 18, 2008). Do Patients Trust Doctors Too Much? The New York Times.
Retrieved from: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/19/health/18chen.html
