TT: Borax Truthers, Vax Deniers, and Bad Science
It really comes down to one simple question: Who are YOU going to believe?
Author’s Note: “Thursday’s Thoughts” is weekly series on a trending topic in the health & wellness space; it is free for all subscribers, but I hope you’ll consider upgrading your sponsorship to continue supporting my work <3
Over the past few weeks, the topic of Borax, or rather, ingesting Borax, has been popping up quite a bit. As we usually find with trending topics, the Borax truthers have been a fringe group of ardent enthusiasts since at least mid-2022 and probably long before that.
There have already been a ton of opinions from people much smarter than me on why you probably should not ingest Borax (Boron and Borax are not the same thing—one is a powder that can cause kidney failure). One Tiktoker, Chem Thug, made a great TikTok about all the potentially harmful side effects: kidney failure, harm to your reproductive organs and developmental issues. But the synthetic organic chemistry Ph.D. candidate (and good on him because I’d rather walk blindfold into traffic than step foot in another classroom), perhaps unknowingly, highlighted a much larger but related issue in his video: what science are we choosing to believe and why?
At one point in the video, ChemThug mentions that after reviewing the available primary data, he believes that the potential harms of ingesting Borax far outweigh the purported benefits of adding boron to your diet—all of the data and a bevy of medical experts back that up. But if people choose not to believe it, that’s a different issue.
Science deniers came out pretty full force in the early days of Covid-19 and doubled down when the vaccine was approved. And, to their credit, they did have some science to back up their claims, for example, reports of Myocarditis, “an inflammation of the middle layer of the heart muscle, and pericarditis, an inflammation of the lining around the heart.” The CDC reported Myocarditis as a side effect in 2021, after several reports of “perfectly healthy” 20-somethings becoming fatally ill after taking the vaccine. But the incidences were few and far between, and rarely fatal.
The anti-vax movement has existed since the early 19th century when the general public rallied against Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccine. And, TBH, I get it—Jenner recommended that parents inject their vulnerable children with a small dosage of a disease with a high mortality rate, citing sanitary, “religious, scientific, and political objections.”
But developments in medical research should make it fairly easy for people to see the benefits of vaccination, right?
No.
Just look at the totally de-bunked “link” between the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism. Don’t get me wrong, the medical/science community is not without its faults, and history teaches us to have a healthy skepticism of healthcare professionals (The Tuskegee experiment and Dr. Marion Sims come to mind), but I struggle with how blindly some choose to believe total strangers on the internet over professional advice backed by science.
I also wonder how much of this can be chalked up to people with chronic illnesses who are desperate for any type of relief. Wherever there is desperation, there are people who will prey on it—from Rasputin to snake oil salesmen, the promise of a long life and a healthy, slender body is enough to entice anybody. And if you dig deep enough, there’s a chance you can find some research to back up any claim—but with any research, you should always ask a few questions:
Who is sponsoring this research?
What are the credentials of the people researchers?
What was the abstract? What were the actual outcomes?
What was the sample size? Was this ever tested on humans?
I guess what I’m trying to say is: the internet contains a lot of advice, and not all of it is good. It’s up to you to figure out what you will accept as your truth and if you’re willing to deal with the consequences if that truth ends up hurting you in the end.