GLP podcast/video: Nutrition myths, debunked; Could ChatGPT spread vaccine misinfo? Treating mental illness with CRISPR might be a bad idea

The public accepts a lot of myths about nutrition. Let’s examine 10 of the most common, but scientifically dubious ideas often treated as established fact. Could anti-vaccine activists misuse ChatGPT to disseminate dangerous nonsense? And how do we stop them? CRISPR may one day help us cure certain mental disorders. But is it worth the risk?

Podcast:

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Video:

Join hosts Dr. Liza Dunn and GLP contributor Cameron English on episode 234 of Science Facts and Fallacies as they break down these latest news stories:

• Organic food is healthier than conventional? Cholesterol is bad for you? Here’s 10 debunked nutrition myths

Should you cut carbs to lose weight? Will saturated fat give you heart disease? Are fresh vegetables better than their frozen counterparts? No, no, and no. These and many other nutrition myths circulate endlessly online. Let’s take a closer look at 10 of the most-common beliefs about the nutritional risks and benefits of the foods we eat every day.

• Can OpenAI prevent vaccine conspiracy theories from bubbling up in ChatGPT conversations?

Any technology is capable of doing great good or terrible evil, and language models like ChatGPT are no exception. While these powerful tools can be used to aggregate and disseminate enormous amounts of useful information, they can be abused by bad actors who want to spread nonsense, too. Some experts are especially worried about anti-vaccine advocates using AI-powered tools to confuse parents about the risks and benefits of immunization. How do we prevent such fringe voices (or anybody else) from misusing these rapidly evolving innovations?

• We could use CRISPR to cure mental illness. Should we?

CRISPR gene editing is a powerful technology with a lot of promise. It’s already been used to enhance the food we eat and treat certain types of inherited blindness, to cite just two examples. Researchers are now exploring the technology’s potential to cure mental disorders like autism and depression. It’s a potentially life-changing application for genetic engineering, but one fraught with serious ethical concerns that can’t be easily addressed. Can we responsibly use CRISPR in these circumstances, or has our techno-inspired hubris finally gotten the best of us?

Cameron J. English is the director of bio-sciences at the American Council on Science and Health. Visit his website and follow him on X @camjenglish