I have noticed a direct correlation between the language of plausible deniability and the increase in the litigation among consumers. Many products no longer guarantee results, but these products may have many positive outcomes. One should try a certain product if they have a specified set of symptoms. Other people have experienced relief and a better quality of life, maybe they could, too.
I would like facts. Will this supplement help me? Oh, it might. Might doesn't pay the bills. Will this new diet help me? Oh, it worked for other people. I am glad other people are doing well. Tell me about the side effects of this new product. Oh, in 90 percent of the test group there are no side effects. Tell me about the other 10 percent. Oh, they experienced severe allergic reactions and were hospitalized. That's not a risk I am willing to take.
I had a conversation with someone a while back about truth. I just wanted to know the truth in education, in politics, and in faith, but my experience in college did not offer those options. The other person replied with, "What is truth?" Now, I'm not one to knock a person for quoting the Bible, but Pontius Pilot would not be my first choice.
He who practices virtue and speaks honestly, who spurns what is gained by oppression, brushing his hands free of contact with a bribe, stopping his ears lest he hear of bloodshed, closing his eyes lest he look on evil. He shall dwell on the heights, his stronghold shall be the rocky fastness, his food and drink in steady supply. Isa 33: 15-16
Comments