You Can't Win A Fight With Your Wife

My wife & I have been married for over 17 years now and over the years, I've learned that I have a better chance of winning the MegaMillions lottery than I have of winning an argument with her.  I tell my residents & fellows the same thing when it comes to dealing w/(demented) patients who are hallucinating or delusional.  You can never convince these patients that their perception isn't reality.

It turns out there are folks who feel so strongly about something that no amount of science will convince them otherwise.  Granted, we haven't always done a good job explaining the difference between the various types of scientific studies that appear to toss the truth around back and forth.  Some days, coffee is good for you; other days, it's not.  I don't blame them.  But on the other hand, all the existing data tells us that vaccines don't cause autism.  But try to convince the parents of a child who was diagnosed w/autism spectrum disorder soon after his/her vaccination, thanks in no small part to Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who has since been discredited by Britain's General Medical Council and whose fraud has been exposed in a 3 part series authored by Brian Deer as published in the British Medical Journal (part 1, 2 & 3).

So it was with great interest that I read the comments posted at www.USAToday.com regarding a study just published in the New England Journal of Medicine that concludes that fish consumption does not affect mercury levels nor does said mercury levels affect heart disease, stroke & mortality risk.  As of the time that I write this post, none of the 23 individuals who posted a comment believed in the conclusion, most pointing to hidden collusion from an obvious agenda - convincing patients to eat more fish.

Well, let me toss in my 2 cents and let's ignore this study, even though "mercury is a toxin", as one individual posted, and others are (rightly) more concerned about its neurotoxic effects.  Most, if not all, studies looking at the relationship between fish consumption and heart disease (without considering mercury) conclude that more (fish) is better.  Likewise, with most, if not all, studies regarding cognitive function & dementing illnesses - more fish means less (cognitive decline).  In none of these studies has there been any demonstration of harm (besides the occasional fishbone, I suppose).  So I look at this study as superfluous but supportive.  But then again, I eat fish (even had sushi last night).  I doubt that I'll ever be able to convince my colleague to do so.