Dear Dad,
There is an abundance of nutrition and health information available—so why should my additions carry any weight? Well, for that reason precisely, my ability to weigh the evidence. Too many of us are focused on finding the exact healthiest, best, or ultimate diet, lifestyle, or fitness plan. I’m focused on determining what direction the evidence points.
By my senior year of high school it was pretty clear where my academic proclivities stood. I was a history and English person, while sciences were not my strength and math barely comprehendible.
So surprisingly, I declared nutrition and dietetics as the major I wished to study entering my freshman year at Syracuse University. Instead of reading, writing, and taking classes that dove into history, policy, and social issues, I spent my time in biochemistry lectures, literal cooking classes, and chemistry labs. My four years of college classes were fine, I performed well enough, and I was able to apply some of what I learned to my football pursuits, but I realized by the beginning of my junior year there was not a clear career path that interested me in the field in nutrition. I remember thinking, “I hope I didn’t waste 4 years of free education.”
Luckily, I remained intellectually curious and relentlessly pursued finding a different field to build my career around. Eventually, I took the odd leap from a nutrition undergraduate degree to law school. I figured my days of studying nutrition were long behind me, but over time realized they had barely begun. You see, inadvertently, I forced myself to learn the highly scientific background information as an undergraduate and then fostered the critical analysis techniques of a lawyer. By non-specialization, I accidentally cross trained my mind in nutrition science and critical legal analysis which now helps me identify certain issues, misrepresentations, and bad arguments when it comes to widely distributed health and nutrition information.
As I write over the coming weeks I want to share with you how I scrutinize nutrition claims like a lawyer preparing for trial—the best and most fun way I know to learn the truth about any topic. The first item that needs to be nailed down, like yesterday, when it comes to looking at health and nutrition claims like a lawyer –what is the burden of proof?
I figured it out. After a few days of reading the same sworn statement I finally connected the dots. It was right in front of me. This epiphany was how I was sure the suspect I had my eye on committed the crime that I was already sure he committed. With a smile on my face I walked into my boss’s office and laid out what I thought I knew. His response, “it’s a great theory, but how can you prove it beyond a reasonable doubt?”
In criminal prosecutions this phrase constantly crawls around your brain. “Beyond a reasonable doubt” is the legal burden of proof required to convict someone of a crime. It is always on the prosecutor and it’s the highest burden of proof that our law imposes. Pitting physical evidence, witness testimony, and strings of existing case law against this standard is what demands intense, detailed, and deep scrutiny of a particular set of facts—an exercise aimed to uncover the truth. To convict, one must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Different burdens of proof are required for criminal and civil trials and the burden can also depend on the issue to be determined. The most common burdens of proof are: beyond a reasonable doubt, clear and convincing, and a preponderance of the evidence. Each burden provides a threshold that must be met before a claim can be accepted as proven. If the facts in a given case do not stack up to the required burden of proof then the evidence does not support the claim and it should be rejected.
Imagine if our legal courtrooms, like the court of public opinion, had no applicable burden of proof. It would be anarchy. There would be no quality thresholds and jurors would have no standards to analyze and weigh the evidence offered to prove a certain claims. Jury deliberations would likely unravel into chaos with little hopes of reaching consensus. Everyone would leave the courthouse more confused than before they entered.
Such a sad state of affairs would not be dissimilar from where we find ourselves as it relates to nutrition, diet, and exercise information. The public receives evidence without an applicable analytical framework. Many people accept nutrition claims only because they read them, saw them, or heard them. There is almost zero scrutiny and therefore most people revert to old habits or trendy fads, likely more confused about what eating habits and lifestyles are actually healthy than before they began looking for the answer.
Don’t let the abundance of information confuse you. Have some standards!
With Love,
JSR
