In previous posts, we talked about how many different opinions there are in the space of health and fitness. It seems like everybody has an answer to what ails you and yet everyone seems to be saying different things. In this post, we will discuss how to sharp-shoot information for clarity and fitness of purpose that helped us cut through the noise.
There is a Lot of Noise Now
With the growth of the internet, we have more and more information available to us. The amount of consumable data available to us is predicted to be 149 Zettabytes (10^21) of data in 2025. This number includes a lot of UGC or user-generated content. Anyone, with a keyboard, a little knowledge, and come time can try to become an influencer. Interestingly enough, data points to the fact we are much more likely to believe other than authoritative bodies such as companies and organizations.
Search engines have various strategies have several techniques to help us sort out what is real and what isn’t. The reality is that also can cause problems such as affirming the wrong information based on reliance on ‘experts’ of which there have been notorious examples of in history. It takes time to discover what is real, and what isn’t, and sometimes we can only speculate. The outcome is we read, hear, and see conflicting things.
Good vs Bad is All About Context
You will hear fat is bad and yet we know fat is a necessary part of our DRI. One site will say you shouldn’t eat dairy, while another organization may say yogurt is considered healthy. Which of the pundits is correct? Sometimes it is both. What matters most is the context of the statement and who the real target audience is.
What exactly do we mean by context? Context means understanding the problem the particular statement is attempting to solve. Understanding context also means understanding who the target audience is and more importantly is not. For example, if you are at risk for high cholesterol, you may want to listen to a medical professional. On the other hand, if you are trying to be a bodybuilder, that information may not pertain to you. Let’s take a look at two articles about the Keto Diet.
Note: We are not giving our opinion on the diet but rather using two different points of view to illustrate why you have to read the fine print when looking at this type of information.
A Tale Of Two Keto’s
The first article by Healthline is a resource that gives the full details of the keto diet. The article paints it in a positive light in terms of how it can help you lose fat. It also talks about the challenges of getting to a ketosis state. As a resource, it does a great job of breaking this down for different types of people with different levels of health.
The second article by Harvard Health Publishing (Harvard Medical School) is not as keen on the keto diet. It talks about its origin to help a specific set of people. The article discusses many more of the challenges of the diet around nutrition deficiencies. Further, it speaks to the fact it is a short-term approach to health.
Apples to Peaches?
To compare apples to apples, let’s consider both articles are written and reviewed by equally reliable authorities. Accredited professionals both wrote and reviewed the article. So then, which is correct? Both! Why? The articles are both written for a different purpose and in a different context. This is where we feel all the information we are bombarded with gets so confusing.
Written by and from the point of view of a Dietician, the Healthline article takes a dietician’s point of view on Keto. Written from the point of view of a Medical Doctor, the Harvard article takes the point of view of a Medical doctor. They are two different roles, with similar, but different points of view. The former wants to help you with your dietary needs. The latter wants to help you holistically with your health and may ask you to seek out a dietician’s help. These are two different lenses on the same topic. When looking at the two it is that context that matters.
Why does it matter? We need to be objective when seeking information to help us. It is very easy to as people to end up in the trap of confirmation or negative bias. We hypothesize that these biases served to protect us at one time in our evolutionary history. Learning isn’t always easy. When seeking knowledge we need to be careful to be open to new information and challenge preconditions. If we are not, we can end up as expert beginners which gives us a measure of success but limits our true potential.
Some Things To Help Be Critical
Here are some context-setting tips for reviewing information to help be critical:
- Understand why the person is telling you the information. Do they stand to gain something by influencing you such as selling you a diet plan or product?
- What lens is the person putting on the subject and are they critical in their judgment of it? Does that lens help align the information with your goals?
- How old is the information? For example, health and fitness information is constantly changing and the article may be out of date such as the 3,500 calorie rule.
- Confirm you are in the target cohort or audience for the information. In our example, there is a large difference between a person’s long-term medical needs and a short-term diet plan.
- Challenge anything without scientific evidence or non-emotional evidence quoted by the article. It isn’t that some influencer or pundit is wrong, but, without any sources, ‘it’s like…just their opinion man.’ (Big Lebowski quote, apologies but had to use it.)
Wrapping Up
Bringing it back around to where we started. The more research we did on our health and goals the more we found this level of contradiction. By applying some basic scientific principles and being critical of the information we were able to understand that misinformation wasn’t misinformation. Much of the information just didn’t apply to us or our sustainability goals.
Further, we also had to look at what group was publishing the information. The American Heart Association can have a different agenda than the USDA. They will publish information based on that agenda which may be focused on an area that is not your need or cohort. For example, the USDA probably isn’t going to be publishing information targeting bodybuilders where someone working in sports medicine may.
This article presented ways to help break through the noise of many health and fitness articles. the human being is a complicated system. Due to that complexity, we need to be critical when seeking advice or adopting a new idea. This is why the context of the information given to you is important. This context-based thinking changes how we start to look at other aspects of our lives. Just because we didn’t agree with what we found didn’t mean it was false or misinformation. Understanding that ‘noise’ was a lack of context was a game changer for us. We feel it will be for you as well.