We are lucky to live in a time where information is widely available and accessible. I’ve been recently thinking about three issues concerning our available information (there are others questions that could be asked). The amount of available information is staggering, because of the volume of information it’s impossible to track it all, and knowing what is accurate (i.e., true) within the wealth of information sources is challenging. How do we sift through what’s available to decide what’s available, what’s useful, and what’s accurate? The answers aren’t simple and may not be comprehensive, but there are ways to wade through it all.
In Sickening (Abramson, John; Sickening – How Big Pharma Broke American Health Care and How We Can Repair It; 1st Edition; Mariner Books; 2022), part of what Dr. Abramson discusses are issues related to misleading information about certain prescription drugs. This book, and some other recent reading about related topics, made me more curious about how test information from scientific studies is interpreted and presented. On the surface, you would expect such studies to be less biased. I picked a “popular” drug class (statins) and did some research.
Not surprisingly, the initial online search, returned over 100 million search results. I narrowed my topic to hope for more relevant results. After narrowing the field and reading 20-30 articles and papers, there were primarily two opposing camps – for and against. (Though it’s not new to those of us who do online searches, these numbers – choosing 20-30 out of millions – represents the overload discussed below.)
Because I was looking for hard data, I followed a path that discussed detailed results of specific drug trials. The answer that I arrived at was not the level of recent opioid discussions, but I was reminded that reports can use numbers (data) in a way that presents results to be more favorable. (Perhaps more discussion of this in a later post, but it involves statistical use of absolute vs relative percentages.) In the end, I wondered how well educated physicians choose to recommend a prescription drug. What do they know? How do they learn what they know? How do they decide what’s true?
This highlights the general issues of having too much information, knowing what to choose, and knowing how to decide information accuracy.
Too Much Information?
Years ago, we went to buildings called “Libraries”, which still exist, when we wanted information. A large public or university library held more books and periodicals than you could read in a lifetime. We got information from a teacher, a parent, or a friend. We read a book (that we bought in person in a physical bookstore), or we read a paper newspaper or a glossy magazine. Now, information is plentiful and widely available. There is more than we can consume, and new information is being generated faster and faster. It easier to access now – we don’t have to wait for the library or the newsstand to open. Since I’m personally curious about information and knowledge, that can be frustrating to me.
“Information” is hard to measure. Information can be a data set (the number of people in your neighborhood), contents of a text message, a written phrase (“there’s more information with less understanding”), an online article/video, or the contents of a 752-page book.
“Data”, on the other hand, can be measured more easily. The amount of data correlates to the amount of available information. Predictions for the next few years are that the worldwide data exchange on the internet will be in the hundreds of zettabytes. The computer I’m currently using has a capacity of 500 GB (gigabytes). A zettabyte is close to one trillion gigabytes. That’s 2 billion of my computer’s drives.
It seems that with so much information available we would be better educated (meaning we know and understand more) and better informed. But many people are neither.
More Information but We Don’t Know More
With so much available information, many of us say we believe education and knowledge are important but don’t seem to be better informed. In fact, with many avenues of entertainment now accessible, learning is not increasing relative to the amount of available resources and general knowledge seems to be on decline in the general population. This is, of course, a general statement. And it is stated primarily in reference to how much we could know based on having broad access to opportunities to learn.
The answer to why we don’t know more is complicated and won’t be fully discussed here. It varies with individuals and varies with groups. What’s popular can be more attractive than learning. It takes time to sort information and know what it means for us. We can be overwhelmed and become frozen. Even if we’re motivated to find answers, how do we sort to find 20 out of 100,000,000?
My search for answers about drug information took some time. I wanted to know answers. Many people don’t want to spend the time or don’t have the time to spend to track down the “truth”. Deciding what is true may be more difficult than solving “the world’s hardest maze“.
Misinformed or Misled?
With access to information (or data) online being very easy, there is a growing amount of misinformation. “Misinformation” can be a simple error, or it can be the result of deliberate deception. Misinformation is spread by individuals, politicians, media outlets, governments, celebrities, business leaders, and bots. Skewing the numbers in scientific test results (that I mentioned above) is a form of misinformation. False claims and statements makes the availability of information both a blessing and a curse.
The growth of false information that’s readily available both contributes to ignorance and can make us think “what’s the use?”. Some may believe everything they read. There is also the individual tendency to confirmation bias (we accept information that matches what we already believe or want to believe) and the growth of misinformation. I don’t always know what to do about it for me. Someone who is inattentive could easily follow a false path.
Is There a Solution?
This article is for individuals. It’s not about the similar problems that businesses and other organizations face related to access to too much data.
I’m not always informed on day-to-day issues. It’s hard to keep track of what’s happening locally, regionally, and nationally – much less what’s happening throughout the world. What I would consider the important issues might not be what you or others consider to be important. So am I lazy or should I just say that I’m ignorant of all the facts?
It can be some of both. Admittedly, I am skeptical of some things I read and hear. But, I don’t chase answers to everything that I wonder about because I know that it will take time. When you combine the amount of available information with confirmation bias, misinformation, and limited time, it’s a complex tangle. I may be diligent about recognizing these limiting factors but not everyone stops to consider the challenge.
Possibilities
For those who do want to face this struggle, there are three partial answers.
- Care to know answers – I wanted to know about a specific drug. It’s important for me to know (at least close to) the truth. Not everyone cares. Not everyone will take time.
- Choose your sources – although confirmation bias influences our sources, we have to work to be willing to seek out other ideas and opinions. In my search for drug information, I did read what both sides said. I still may have been biased since I was looking for confirmation of what I suspected. But, I chose to read what the pro-drug people said. I didn’t watch 30-second videos about it. I looked for information that had a more technical information. Finding answers may be harder for issues that are often debated in politics and business.
- Practice filtering – we only have so much time but there are a myriad of sources of information. Many sources can be a distraction. I don’t watch local television news, for example. To me, most of what they discuss is not about providing information that I can use. “News” about the latest robbery or vehicle accident is not unimportant, but I don’t consider it to be valuable. For me. So I filter my sources.
These are partial and they are a short list of options. There is much more to continue thinking about and practicing as we try to individually handle information and misinformation.