..And welcome back to another round of Counter Arguments! A repository of counter thoughts for the skeptics. Today, are my response(s) on a mix of current health-care paradigm, social media, and the influencer-landscape.

"Statins save lives! I trust my doctor! Why can't you trust doctors /GPS??"

Ask them back the following two (2) people whom they'd trust.

1. "A doctor who believes what the majority says?"
2. "A doctor who researched, tasted (most importantly) and trusted their own medicine?"

Imagine, if you are the founder of statins. You have high LDL. Your doctor prescribe statins.

Yet your gut instinct as the very founder of the entire drug mechanism - says otherwise.

That is exactly a dilemma Dr. Akira Endo once faced.

• “Don’t worry,” the doctor told Endo, “I know some very good drugs to lower your cholesterol.” But here’s the real twist: Endo refused the statin prescription. His LDL was only modestly elevated, so Endo decided to try bringing his cholesterol under control by exercising more. " ~ Protomag.com
• " Despite his groundbreaking discovery, which has been leveraged into a multi-billion-dollar industry, Endo, 74, was reluctant to take statin drugs himself; he told the Wall Street Journal in 2006 that he briefly took Mevacor, but eventually stopped and lowered his cholesterol by working out more." ~ Scientific American

....And we have side effects. Well I don't have the space unfortunately to include them all here.

• "Yet the drugs were nearly abandoned during several crucial stages of development, and despite defenders’ assurances that statins are safe, they have been linked to reports of side effects from the beginning. Complaints about muscle pain and fatigue are the most common, though some users have reported cognitive and psychological problems such as poor memory and depression. For statins, the common perception that the drugs may cause unpleasant side effects could help explain why so many people quit refilling their prescriptions. In one trial, three of four elderly patients instructed to take a statin stopped using the pills as directed within five years."
  ~ Protomag.com
• "In 2012, the FDA introduced certain changes to the safety information on the labels of statins, which included a small increased risk of higher blood sugar levels and subsequent type 2 diabetes diagnosis. Furthermore, statin labels now also report potential cognitive effects such as confusion and memory loss."
  ~ news-medical.net

If, you get a "Who do you think you are?" remark ~ consider that a hit on a nerve. Perhaps best to apologise in front of them, then craft a polite exit.

• "I make my own decisions on who I should trust. I don't blindly follow anyone."

"You should follow this person! that person!"

Firstly, thank them for their opinion. Then give them a reminder:

1. "Everyone, is probably, at one time or another~ just as weak as you are."

If the answer you get is "Yes, so what?", then here are my response option(s):

1. "Then, congratulations! You probably have your own influencer to follow. Yourself."
2. "Why do you need a secondary opinion to validate your bias?"
3. "Why do you feel the need to impose - another person for me to follow?" 

If "So who do you follow then?" is their reaction,  I'd typically say "Nobody". 

But if they start getting curious with all the "Why's?" ~ you have a choice either to proceed by simply responding objectively, or pave respectful exit.  If the conversation is brief / water-cooler  ~ I'd pave a respectful exit sooner than later.

Either way, a respectful exit here should ideally be one and the same = leave them be ~ let them decide who they want to believe.

• "Nobody is as valuable than your own choice on what (or who) you want to believe."

"You think you're smarter than <xyz>?"

I would aim for an exit statement as fast, and as readily possible you can. All on the spot. This if course, easier said than done. I would say:

• "I am finding / hinting that this conversation is potentially invasive. It's likely not doing us any favour."
• "I have never intended to condescend. I'm sorry you feel that way. But ~ would you agree that there's nothing agreeable in this conversation?"

You may (unexpectedly) trigger some insecurity. I would observe and pause wherever possible. Depending on the tone of their voice, if they're somewhat open and willing to be patient you can proceed below. If not, pave an exit statement.

(Given the opportunity) ~ ask them if they are happy about or with ~ their own selves.

• "Are you happy with what you are doing at the moment?"

Once you've gained rapport over their successes (or failures). Acknowledge them. But ~ prepare a counter remark.

• "That's great. So at least you have done something for yourselves. But ~ do you always assume everyone is trying to win over you? If so, I am sorry you must have been down on your luck. " 
• "What else do you think we can gain from all this? Than me admitting you are better or smarter than me? I don't think this kind of conversation benefits either of us."

"Why aren’t you active on social media?"

Generally depending on the situation, I would respond:

• (In formal situations) ~ “I do not wish to be judged discreetly. At least without my consent.”
• (In casual situations / water cooler talks / small talks) “My social media is my own space. Whether there’s something or none at all, is none of your concern.”

Depending on context (narcissism or elsewhere) ~ it's probably good idea to remind them that all numbers you see as a "response" or hedonic feedback are all inflationary.

• "The reason why I don't really care much about my metrics is because, well they're "Vanity Metrics". "I know there is never going to be enough followers or subscribers or likes anyway."
• "Thus, all likes, subscribers and all - are all inflationary."

Kelly Sikkema @ Unsplash

If the context is on careers / jobs...

On side tangent I’d like to spend a minute acknowledging anyone (or everyone) out there struggling   applying for job(s). Amidst these trying times.

I recommend practising / reprising / rephrasing these over and over.

“Thank you <sir / madam> for conducting this screening at your discretion. However I stand by my own need for privacy; as for yet another reason that I do not wish to be judged unfairly, untimely nor prematurely ~ by erroneous conclusions of others without my consent.”

"You are just recycling old self-help books advice and philosophy!"

I would firstly beckon their judgment.

• "Absolutely ~ my thoughts or what I think about my ways of nutrition - may not seem all that new. It's indeed recycled just the same as arguments of CICO, Garbage-in-garbage-out"

If they respond with "So what's new about your's then, huh?" ~ then I'd elaborate:

• "Me, I am happy with my own ways of eating, thank you. I do have polarising view(s) on nutrition or philosophy but I don't just cling to just one (1) of them. In fact, I have several very competing viewpoint(s) in all areas, that helped me identify when to fast or not to fast. When to carbohydrate refeed versus not. I don't cling to just one (1) method ever after. 

Observe their reaction. If they don't respond. Continue probing with a very important question.

"Do you actually know what Self-Help really is?"

If their response is "Ideas and help from other people of course! I learn from all sorts! This person, that person, that figure, that influencer, ABC, XYZ, etc!",

Then, I would gently remind them (anything except "have you looked at yourself in the mirror?"):

• "Self help, only helps if you help yourself."

(Again) If they start objecting or knee-jerk anger, it's sign enough you've hit (another) nerve.

• "Let me be clear that I am not special. It's how much I care about it that relates to me and that I only want to keep things for myself. And how do I do this? Decades of "helping my own self". Questioning what I can or cannot do. Question all narrative(s). 

Conclusion

So that wraps up another food-for-thoughts for the skeptics! Until next time.

Live-It-Forward,

AW.