Saturday, March 8, 2008

Honi Soit Qui Mal Y Pense

Human beings have a wide range of belief systems, techniques of reasoning, and methods of problem solving. Some of them are logical. The issue at hand is not how one confronts complex geopolitical or sociological challenges that affect the planet. On the contrary, to paraphrase Mark Twain: “Man is the only animal that lies about its health or needs to.”

In numerous, unintentionally funny studies, experimenters derived statistics about weight loss from telephone conversations with the involved participants. The researcher would discuss height, weight, eating patterns, and exercise regimens with a disembodied voice on the other end of the telephone line. Was proof offered? Was there visible, objective evidence of these statements, perhaps provided by a digital optical device linked to an e-mail address? Or did the researchers rely on scientific noblesse oblige, a blind faith in the honesty and integrity of those being studied?

You already know the answer: many people lied. Interestingly, men lied about their height, hoping that their weight would seem better to the researcher if distributed among extra imaginary inches. Women who were less than contrite would give their weight in high school. Another study, even more mirthful than this one, added another step: the arrival at the experimental subject’s home of a small van with a scale in the back. Oops! The scale’s readings often didn’t match the reported poundage. But the deception these people attempted was minor compared to their self-deception, namely that the vital statistics involved were inconsequential—to the medical study, to the researchers, and to themselves.

Self-deception takes many forms, but the most potentially lethal ones concern health. “I don’t need to get a checkup because I feel okay.” “I read numerous health-related websites daily, which means that I have great insight into my own body.” “I take numerous vitamin supplements—so I don’t need to worry about cancer or heart disease.” “There are many studies that show no correlation between weight and human illness—please pass the chocolate syrup.”

Self-validation is a method used by self-deceptive individuals to rationalize their questionable behavior patterns. Albert Ellis called it “crooked thinking.” Dr. Stanley Krippner has written extensively on “personal mythology.” But I think it sounds better in French: honi soit qui mal y pense. Which I translate somewhat loosely as: “Whatever you say.”

May I offer some medical examples? A diabetic might tell me: “I can eat whatever I want—I just have to take extra insulin.” A hypertensive might offer: “I don’t need to follow a low salt diet. I’m taking a water pill.” An overweight person might step to the counter and order a low-fat muffin with a large orange juice. It’s right because I say it’s right!

The original French expression originally appeared in an entirely different context. It was a reproach to people who think that something relatively innocent is shameful and scandalous (namely, the accidental slipping of a leg garter while a woman was dancing in front of British royalty). I’ve brought the expression into modern times with its converse meaning—it isn’t scandalous because I say it isn’t scandalous.

“I’ve had a hard day at work, so I deserve to eat anything I want, especially at dessert time.” “My children aren’t overweight. That’s baby fat, and they will outgrow it eventually.” “March is the perfect time of year to go on a diet. I needed all that extra padding during the winter to protect me against the flu.” Do any of these sound familiar? Is there anything remotely logical in these statements? Have you heard (or thought) anything similar recently?

If so, go to the mirror, look at yourself, smirk, and repeat after me: honi soit qui mal y pense. And then, stop trying to fool yourself.

Sunday, March 2, 2008

The Observer Effect

Principles of science can be useful tools, especially when you watch or read promotional material from the weight-loss industry. For the past 40 years, The Dark Ages of Dieting, Americans have been offered a wide range of ineffective therapies, all purportedly having innate logic and objective validity. Pharmaceutical corporations-- although themselves the subject of much controversy and scrutiny-- are exemplary models of ethical rigor when compared with supposedly trustworthy “nutritional” sources.

Let’s not discuss, for the moment, whether or not grapefruit, cabbage, red peppers, unlimited protein, the glycemic index, macadamia nut oil, or salmon is the unique cure for obesity—or why these epiphanies were reached by individuals, as opposed to physicians at the Mayo Clinic or the Pasteur Institute. Several years ago, I had the unique pleasure of congratulating a voluptuous television star on her new weight-loss vitamin line--I was being polite, and you would have too. Did she design the formulations from her own research into biochemistry and physiology? Could she spell?

Scientific research, a discipline totally unknown to a majority of Americans, includes certain “checks and balances” that ensure the integrity of the findings and their interpretation. One safeguard is protecting against the observer effect, a phenomenon somewhat tangentially related to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. Here’s an easy example: students will behave differently if their exams are proctored by several teachers—observation of their behavior (by watchful monitors) will affect their actions (avoiding cheating). Do you drive more carefully when police cars, hidden cameras, or speed traps might be present? Observation of your behavior, whether visible or possible, makes you much more likely to follow the rules of the road.

How about a television spokesperson for a weight-loss program? Is he or she totally motivated by health concerns, idealistic beliefs, or the need to lower cholesterol? On the contrary, the mere fact that this individual is being observed (and, of course, paid) affects his or her own food choices, exercise schedule, and wardrobe contents. This doesn’t happen if the spokesperson is trying to sell you home insurance, power drills, or lawn furniture. Are you impressed when that spokesperson “sticks to the program” and is photographed in smaller-sized clothing?

A fascinating weight-loss study reported in the British Medical Journal several years ago described two groups of experimental subjects. The first group was given precise caloric guidelines by medical personnel and nutritionists. The second group, the “controls”, were simply told that they were in a weight-loss study but given no instructions of any kind. Not surprisingly, both groups lost weight, although the first group did slightly better. The observer effect was responsible for this unusual outcome. When people become aware that their weight is being watched by others—no matter what the reason—behavioral changes can occur, even if not specified or supervised.

How does the observer effect play a part in your daily life? That’s at the epicenter of The Park Avenue Diet, since one’s image—which is a projection into society of a lifestyle pattern—is by definition the only thing other people can observe. Upgrading appearance and behavior can enhance this phenomenon, leading to better relationships, job opportunities, and health. How the outside world perceives us is extraordinarily important—so let the observer effect become your strategic partner, not a mechanism of distortion and misinformation.