Think Deeply, Think Well.
Founded by Drs. Sara and Jack Gorman, authors of the revolutionary new title ‘Denying to the Grave’, Critica is a community committed to making rational decisions about health and security. In a culture dominated by polarizing politics, and an abundance of unchecked misinformation, Critica exists to revolutionize the role of science in making rational health decisions.
Recent Updates
See what we’ve been up to lately at Critica.
Denying to the Grave: Why We Ignore the Facts that Will Save Us
The gap between what scientific evidence shows and the public believes has never been wider. In “Denying to the Grave: Why We Ignore the Facts that Will Save Us” Drs. Sara and Jack Gorman explore the reason behind science denial. The renowned father-daughter team call upon psychology, behavioral economics, epidemiology, and neuroscience to identify six basic reasons that people refuse to accept scientific findings. Using case studies such as vaccination refusal, personal gun ownership, climate change denial, and fear of GMOs, the authors show that even highly intelligent people are prone to fall victim to false conspiracy theories, anti-science charismatic leaders, and the confirmation bias, to make errant risk predictions and to shun scientific complexity. The Gormans make seven explicit recommendations for closing the gap between scientists and the lay public, placing the burden on scientists, journalists, educators, and all consumers of scientific information.
Will science survive in a ‘post-truth’ society?
Following the publication of our critically acclaimed book, Denying to the Grave, Jack and I are launching Critica, a place for respectful dialogue about health and security matters. Come join us in exploring the ways our psychology and perceptions lead us to misguided decisions, and help us develop methods and programs for making informed ones.
Commentary
Read our take on important and relevant health and science topics.
When Prediction Is Not Prevention
Last month we noted that it took two celebrity suicides and a seemingly shocking CDC report demonstrating increasing suicide rates in the US to get professionals, the media, and the public to finally focus their attention on suicide. Suddenly, medical journals, newspapers, and social media are abuzz with the news that we have an “epidemic of […]
Food for Thought Hampers Trust in Science
There are few areas of science that attract as much attention by media and its consumers than nutrition. It seems that almost every time a study is published that touts a particular food or diet as having special health benefits, it garners headlines.
One of the few things most of us believe we control is what we eat. That makes it highly attractive to think we can prevent seemingly uncontrollable events like heart disease, cancer, and dementia by choosing the right foods. It is even better when we are told we can do this without ever feeling hungry.
It is not surprising, therefore, that science and the public intersect so frequently around diet and nutrition. Given that we want people to trust science and incorporate it into decisions about personal health and safety, it would seem of critical importance that the nutritional science imparted to the public be trustworthy and reported accurately. We have been following stories about nutritional studies closely because of their potential impact on how non-scientists judge the value of what they hear and read about scientists’ work and findings. Sadly, there are few areas of science as prone to mistakes, misunderstandings, and hype than nutrition.
Read More Commentary Articles → Subscribe to Commentary Articles →