Editing Pseudoscience (section)

===Health and education implications===
Distinguishing science from pseudoscience has practical implications in the case of [[health care]], expert testimony, [[Environmental policy|environmental policies]], and [[science education]]. Treatments with a patina of scientific authority which have not actually been subjected to actual scientific testing may be ineffective, expensive and dangerous to patients and confuse health providers, insurers, government decision makers and the public as to what treatments are appropriate. Claims advanced by pseudoscience may result in government officials and educators making bad decisions in selecting curricula.{{refn|group=Note|"From a practical point of view, the distinction is important for decision guidance in both private and public life. Since science is our most reliable source of knowledge in a wide variety of areas, we need to distinguish scientific knowledge from its look-alikes. Due to the high status of science in present-day society, attempts to exaggerate the scientific status of various claims, teachings, and products are common enough to make the demarcation issue serious. For example, creation science may replace evolution in studies of biology."<ref name="Stanford-Demarcations"/>}}

The extent to which students acquire a range of social and [[cognitive]] thinking skills related to the proper usage of science and technology determines whether they are scientifically literate.<!-- <ref name="Hurd"/> --> Education in the sciences encounters new dimensions with the changing landscape of [[Science, technology and society|science and technology]], a fast-changing culture and a knowledge-driven era.<!-- <ref name="Hurd"/> --> A reinvention of the school science curriculum is one that shapes students to contend with its changing influence on human welfare.<!-- <ref name="Hurd"/> --> Scientific literacy, which allows a person to distinguish science from pseudosciences such as astrology, is among the attributes that enable students to adapt to the changing world.<!-- <ref name="Hurd"/> --> Its characteristics are embedded in a curriculum where students are engaged in resolving problems, conducting investigations, or developing projects.<ref name="Hurd">{{cite journal|vauthors=Hurd PD|title=Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world|journal=Science Education|volume=82|issue=3|pages=407–16|year=1998|doi=10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199806)82:3<407::AID-SCE6>3.0.CO;2-G|bibcode=1998SciEd..82..407H}}{{subscription required}}</ref>

[[Alan J. Friedman]] mentions why most scientists avoid educating about pseudoscience, including that paying undue attention to pseudoscience could dignify it.<ref>{{harvp|Efthimiou|Llewellyn|2006|p=4}}&nbsp;–&nbsp;Efthimiou quoting Friedman: "We could dignify pseudoscience by mentioning it at all".</ref>

On the other hand, [[Robert L. Park]] emphasizes how pseudoscience can be a threat to society and considers that scientists have a responsibility to teach how to distinguish science from pseudoscience.<ref>{{harvp|Efthimiou|Llewellyn|2006|p=4}}&nbsp;–&nbsp;Efthimiou quoting Park: "The more serious threat is to the public, which is not often in a position to judge which claims are real and which are ''voodoo''. ... Those who are fortunate enough to have chosen science as a career have an obligation to ''inform the public about voodoo science''".</ref>

Pseudosciences such as homeopathy, even if generally benign, are used by [[charlatan]]s.<!-- <ref name="Haven"/> --> This poses a serious issue because it enables incompetent practitioners to administer health care.<!-- <ref name="Haven"/> --> True-believing zealots may pose a more serious threat than typical con men because of their delusion to homeopathy's ideology.<!-- <ref name="Haven"/> --> Irrational health care is not harmless and it is careless to create patient confidence in pseudomedicine.<ref name="Haven">{{cite news|url=http://www.ncahf.org/pp/homeop.html#haven|author=The National Council Against Health Fraud|title=NCAHF Position Paper on Homeopathy|year=1994|access-date=19 January 2011|archive-date=25 December 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181225185228/https://www.ncahf.org/pp/homeop.html#haven|url-status=live}}</ref>

On 8 December 2016, journalist Michael V. LeVine pointed out the dangers posed by the ''[[Natural News]]'' website: "Snake-oil salesmen have pushed false cures since the dawn of medicine, and now websites like ''Natural News'' flood social media with dangerous anti-pharmaceutical, anti-vaccination and anti-GMO pseudoscience that puts millions at risk of contracting preventable illnesses."<ref name="LeVine">{{cite web|last=LeVine|first=Michael|date=8 December 2016|title=What scientists can teach us about fake news and disinformation|work=[[Business Insider]]|url=http://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-fake-news-and-disinformation-pseudoscience-2016-12|access-date=15 December 2016|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161210131026/http://www.businessinsider.com/scientists-fake-news-and-disinformation-pseudoscience-2016-12|archive-date=10 December 2016}}</ref>

The [[anti-vaccine movement]] has persuaded large numbers of parents not to vaccinate their children, citing pseudoscientific research that links [[Vaccines and autism|childhood vaccines with the onset of autism]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite book|title=Pseudoscience: The Conspiracy Against Science|last1=Kaufman|first1=Allison|last2=Kaufman|first2=James|publisher=MIT Press|year=2017|isbn=978-0-262-03742-6|location=Cambridge, MA|pages=239}}</ref> These include the study by [[Andrew Wakefield]], which claimed that a combination of [[gastrointestinal disease]] and [[developmental regression]], which are often seen in children with [[Autism spectrum|ASD]], occurred within two weeks of receiving vaccines.<ref name="XVPKO">{{Cite book|title=Critical Thinking, Science, and Pseudoscience: Why We Can't Trust Our Brains|last1=Lack|first1=Caleb|last2=Rousseau|first2=Jacques|publisher=Springer Publishing Company, LLC|year=2016|isbn=978-0-8261-9419-0|location=New York|pages=221}}</ref><ref name="FFury">{{Cite book|title=Science and Pseudoscience in Clinical Psychology, Second Edition|last1=Lilienfeld|first1=Scott|last2=Lynn|first2=Steven Jay|last3=Lohr|first3=Jeffrey|publisher=Guilford Publications|year=2014|isbn=978-1-4625-1789-3|location=New York|pages=435}}</ref> The study was eventually retracted by its publisher, and Wakefield was stripped of his license to practice medicine.<ref name=":1"/>

[[Alkaline water]] is water that has a pH of higher than 7, purported to host numerous health benefits, with no empirical backing. A practitioner known as [[Robert O. Young]] who promoted alkaline water and an "[[Alkaline diet]]" was sent to jail for 3 years in 2017 for practicing medicine without a license.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Mahdawi |first=Arwa |date=2018-10-29 |title=Is alkaline water a miracle cure – or BS? The science is in |language=en-GB |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/oct/29/alkaline-water-cure-bs-science-beyonce-tom-brady |access-date=2023-12-01 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref>