The Question We Don’t Ask Enough
How often do you ask yourself, “What if I’m wrong?”
In a world where media has become more focused on the politics than truth, research has become untrustworthy, AI hallucinates facts, and extreme opinions receive the most attention, it is more than likely that all of us hold at least one opinion dear that is completely wrong.
This is a question that drives much of my work—and if you're new here, it's the heart of my book, Fixing Food: An FDA Insider Unravels the Myths and the Solutions.
And good news: From now through July 15, you can listen to the audiobook for 50% off.
But asking that question—and truly trying to answer it—isn’t easy.
It’s often hard for us to find a contradictory opinion or data.
In fact, we make sure that we don’t challenge ourselves by only interacting with sources that confirm our biases. This traps us in “a sort of echo chamber, and without being challenged, the biased thoughts prevail.”
The Comfort of Certainty
It’s comfortable to be in this trap—it doesn’t require any intellectual effort not to sort through evidence that either contradicts our beliefs or suggests that there is not enough information to know what is true.
The latter case can be seen in the latest “scientific” pronouncements on health scares including microplastics, forever chemicals (PFAS) and ultra processed foods (UPF).
For example, the FDA has said “There is still a lot we need to learn about UPF ….it is important to understand why and how UPF may be negatively impacting health…” They are currently working on defining them.
On the other hand, Googles AI Overview says, “No, ultra processed foods are generally not considered safe due their association with various health risks.” AI knows they are not safe, but FDA says we don’t yet know how to define them and all we can say is that they may be negatively affecting health.
Facts vs. Fear
There is no shortage of people willing to say that we know these things are dangerous—and it is easy to believe them. Particularly, if it appears to be someone else’s fault.
But facts sometimes find their way in. A 2025 Nature study found “almost unbelievable levels (as much weight as a plastic spoon) of micro and nano plastics in the brains of human cadavers.” Three Senators followed up and said, “Every week, we consume the equivalent of a credit card’s worth of plastic.”
But some of those plastics may be lipids (fats) due to nano plastics’ similar size and shapes. What’s more, there are thousands of kinds of micro and nano plastics and many kinds of pollutants on them—and we don’t really know which, if any, are dangerous.
And yet, just like politicians, many people have already formed opinions about microplastics. Even if new evidence points in a different direction, they will have a difficult time reversing those attitudes.
Good Luck Finding the Other Side
Even if you ask, “What if I’m wrong,” and seek sources that contradict your belief, you may not be easily able to find them.
And that’s the rub.
If your theories happen to conform to popular narratives, you may find that Google— or any popular search engines including new AI programs like ChatGPT—will not offer any contradictory evidence. Traditional sources such as newspapers and other media outlets are also no help as they echo groupthink.
Even some professional journals, including those in science and economics, print only conforming studies. Until recently, most science journals were not interested in publishing studies that showed no problem, e.g., a chemical did not cause cancer. In other cases, journal editors only published papers that align with their professional or political beliefs.
What If We’re All Wrong?
Because this has now become a widespread group phenomenon, “What if I’m wrong?” becomes part of a larger question: “What if we’re wrong?”
If more people began to ask this, we might see more contrary thinking. There would be more journals, media outlets, search engines, and AI models that spring up to provide different theories and hidden facts that point us in new directions. We’ve seen these market forces at work before.
Sometimes Outsiders Get it Right
Australians gave us Fox News in 1996 as there was a dearth of news and commentary that appealed to conservative audiences. It is now the most watched cable news network in the US, competing with CNN and MSNBC.
Australian doctors also reversed a false belief that persisted for over 50 years: that stress and spicy foods caused ulcers. They won the Nobel prize by showing the real cause was a bacterium (helicobacter pylori). They were opposed for 23 years by the scientific community, and one of them, Barry Marshall, had to deliberately infect himself with the bacteria to give himself an ulcer. Further research has shown that some strains of H. pylori can be helpful, and so there is now a more nuanced debate.
A Call for Contradiction
Today, some science journals are starting to publish contradictory theories and evidence—and maybe we will see more of that in different venues.
Perhaps saying “I was wrong” will be treated not as a weakness, but a sign of intellectual honesty.
Subscribe to my Substack here.