Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Science vs. Scruples
richln
Posts: 809 Member
I am troubled today to learn about some very disturbing accusations against one of the most influential figures in the fitness and nutrition industry: Alan Aragon.
https://deadspin.com/how-celebrity-nutritionist-alan-aragon-used-his-status-1828684798
This is a person that has contributed greatly to the field by championing a scientific approach that relies on evidence-based information and objective reasoning in an industry that is flooded with charlatans and snake-oil salesman.
Alan will likely face a major personal downfall over this, but no doubt he will eventually continue to produce valuable science to the field. Is it moral to contribute to an immoral person's financial gain by subscribing to their research reviews, reading their scientific papers, attending their speaking events, following them on social media, etc.? Should their professional insight be shunned so that knowledge is intentionally suppressed due to personal moral objection?
https://deadspin.com/how-celebrity-nutritionist-alan-aragon-used-his-status-1828684798
This is a person that has contributed greatly to the field by championing a scientific approach that relies on evidence-based information and objective reasoning in an industry that is flooded with charlatans and snake-oil salesman.
Alan will likely face a major personal downfall over this, but no doubt he will eventually continue to produce valuable science to the field. Is it moral to contribute to an immoral person's financial gain by subscribing to their research reviews, reading their scientific papers, attending their speaking events, following them on social media, etc.? Should their professional insight be shunned so that knowledge is intentionally suppressed due to personal moral objection?
3
Replies
-
Science and objective reality aren't a person....you can agree with thrm without having that agreement associated with whatever person just happened to point it out to you.
It is perfect okay to agree that the sky is blue even if it was Hitler who told you that.
As far as research the person in question actually conducted? Assuming it is unbiased professional research I'm not sure how they gain financially from you agreeing with it. Such research should be in the public domain. If this is "science" that the person sells for a fee on their own website and can't be found anywhere else then I'm not sure how "science" it actually is.21 -
#metoo7
-
A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.
If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.1 -
Doesn't seem hurt politicians and Hollywood types. Just depends on how good your spin doctors are.9
-
A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.
If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
If his career is destroyed because of his behaviour he has no one to blame but himself.21 -
I don't think that his (highly inappropriate) conduct negates the research he's done or his subject matter knowledge. But it certainly has already had a huge adverse effect upon his future in the field. Most of his peers in the evidence-based nutrition/training world have publicly dissociated themselves from him and strongly condemned his actions, and all of his scheduled speaking engagements have been canceled.
I still feel he has a lot to offer as far as research/knowledge goes. The question is whether or not he will take the appropriate actions to redeem himself - and if so, if other people will be willing to acknowledge it and let him back into the fold at some point.8 -
Nony_Mouse wrote: »A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.
If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
If his career is destroyed because of his behaviour he has no one to blame but himself.
So, this. But also this.Science and objective reality aren't a person....you can agree with thrm without having that agreement associated with whatever person just happened to point it out to you.
It is perfect okay to agree that the sky is blue even if it was Hitler who told you that.
As far as research the person in question actually conducted? Assuming it is unbiased professional research I'm not sure how they gain financially from you agreeing with it. Such research should be in the public domain. If this is "science" that the person sells for a fee on their own website and can't be found anywhere else then I'm not sure how "science" it actually is.
He will certainly pay a price for his issues but, for me personally, it is hate the wrong but forgive the wrongdoer. But that only applies if the wrongdoer admits his wrong, seeks forgiveness and does anything in their power to make the situation right and repair the damage they caused.13 -
...He will certainly pay a price for his issues but, for me personally, it is hate the wrong but forgive the wrongdoer. But that only applies if the wrongdoer admits his wrong, seeks forgiveness and does anything in their power to make the situation right and repair the damage they caused.
Well said. Agree 100%.2 -
His peer-reviewed scientific pubs & credentials will continue to be what they are: science.A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.
If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
The body of scientific knowledge is full of things learned in ways now considered immoral. Mengele and Tuskeegee are among the most infamous, but there's plenty of other examples out there. The knowledge stands.
As for research published by people who've done things that some other people have sometimes considered immoral, I think that covers all research ever done by human beings. Look at Galileo vs. the Inquisition.
If the research is worthwhile, it will be done by somebody. The church stopped Galileo, but it didn't stop others from working out planetary orbits and the physics involved.
However -
This guy's expert opinion is his opinion, and if you're paying for that, you're paying him. If you're buying the stuff he advertises, you're paying him.
IMO, once you know that he's behaved in ways you find unacceptable, whether you can give the guy your money without wanting to vomit is a matter of your own morality.
8 -
Evelyn_Gorfram wrote: »
His peer-reviewed scientific pubs & credentials will continue to be what they are: science.A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.
If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
The body of scientific knowledge is full of things learned in ways now considered immoral. Mengele and Tuskeegee are among the most infamous, but there's plenty of other examples out there. The knowledge stands.
As for research published by people who've done things that some other people have sometimes considered immoral, I think that covers all research ever done by human beings. Look at Galileo vs. the Inquisition.
If the research is worthwhile, it will be done by somebody. The church stopped Galileo, but it didn't stop others from working out planetary orbits and the physics involved.
However -
This guy's expert opinion is his opinion, and if you're paying for that, you're paying him. If you're buying the stuff he advertises, you're paying him.
IMO, once you know that he's behaved in ways you find unacceptable, whether you can give the guy your money without wanting to vomit is a matter of your own morality.
Just by way of clarification, as far as I know, he has never advertised or endorsed a product. He's spoken at length about this. He always felt it would compromise his objectivity as a researcher. If I recall correctly, he has a pay site in the past. I think it was called Research Review. I have no problem with his desire to monetize his work efforts. I believe he no longer has that site. But we all have to make a living. He also does personal training to elite athletes and celebrities. I think he was making a fine living prior to this issue coming to light.0 -
A bit of background context... Aragon sells his expert opinion in his research reviews, speaking engagements, and I would also guess he makes some significant advertising money. He has also produced some relatively famous peer-reviewed literature regarding protein timing, bodybuilding contest prep nutrition, and BCAA supplementation. These journal publications contribute to his credentials and therefore his earning potential.
If his career is now destroyed because of his behavior, we may never get anything new from him.
I think his actions certainly can affect and should affect his career depending on how egregious they were and if he is in fact guilty of them (I know nothing about this so not going to weigh in there). All I meant is that the actions of a person who contributed to science should not in any way taint the actual science that they produced.
If, however, you are paying him directly for his opinion or his views then yeah I think its reasonable to consider who he is as a person and whether or not you want to support that.6 -
I wouldn't use Mengele as an example of "ends justifying means". His experiments weren't scrupulous enough to be meaningful. To prepare for this response, I read up on Mengele on wiki. I find it peculiarly satisfying that his bones are stored in a medical school and are brought out as educational aids for future doctors.0
-
Ends justifying means wasn't quite what I was driving at, more like salvaging what good could be extricated from the results of past (and thus now unchangeable) bad actions; but I take your point.I wouldn't use Mengele as an example of "ends justifying means". His experiments weren't scrupulous enough to be meaningful. To prepare for this response, I read up on Mengele on wiki. I find it peculiarly satisfying that his bones are stored in a medical school and are brought out as educational aids for future doctors.
I was wrong: Mengele is indeed an incorrect example. As you said, his studies produced nothing of scientific merit. Moreover, he was a Nazi, making me the first to mention Nazis on this thread; and thus, in accordance with the corollary to Godwin's law, causing me to have forfeited the debate.
6 -
Should their professional insight be shunned so that knowledge is intentionally suppressed due to personal moral objection?
If the work is worth doing (and there is money to be made) then someone else will step in to the gap and do it. Maybe even someone who spends more time working and less time assaulting people! That's the nature of research (and capitalism). I don't think Aragon, or anyone, is the fitness-Einstein who we can't possibly afford to lose. We have possibly already lost valuable contributions from the women he's been groping, if they were put off attending conferences and showcasing their work because of his behaviour.
He will certainly pay a price for his issues but, for me personally, it is hate the wrong but forgive the wrongdoer. But that only applies if the wrongdoer admits his wrong, seeks forgiveness and does anything in their power to make the situation right and repair the damage they caused.
He has already tried to discredit one woman who came forward (detailed in the article posted) so he's not doing a good job of that so far. And it seems he's been doing it for years. But crocodile tears and a good publicist can do wonders for a man who can't keep his hands to himself.12 -
Evelyn_Gorfram wrote: »...
Moreover, he was a Nazi, making me the first to mention Nazis on this thread; and thus, in accordance with the corollary to Godwin's law, causing me to have forfeited the debate.
No worries
Aaron mentioned Hitler in the first reply. Was inevitable for this topic I think. 3 -
This content has been removed.
-
In many senses, I view this the same way I do athletes and movie stars and similar who get in trouble for off-the-field issues. I can condemn the action, but that doesn't negate the value or their ability or their success in the field. The 2 are separate (for me). IMO, you do not have to be a good person to be good at your job, and strength or weakness of character does not add to nor take away from your credentials (at least, not in all scenarios/professions).
While I understand the zero tolerance mentality as it relates to abuse/violence... I think sometimes we (society, media, a very general "we") sometimes go too far. Not every offender should be locked in their basement for the rest of their lives because they are an inherent threat to society. Yet, that's the way many are looked at/talked about (at least those often tend to be the loudest voices).
Coming back around...
While I probably won't be looking to bring A.A. in as a trainer for myself/family, I will continue to read his work and hold his knowledge in high regard.8 -
IMO, you do not have to be a good person to be good at your job, and strength or weakness of character does not add to nor take away from your credentials (at least, not in all scenarios/professions).
Not every offender should be locked in their basement for the rest of their lives because they are an inherent threat to society.
If I bring my company into disrepute by my actions I lose my job. That could be as small as posting the wrong thing on social media. If I sexually assault another engineer at a conference it doesn't mean I can't design things, but I should both lose my job and possibly be arrested. If you can't do your job without committing crimes then you are not actually good at your job. Aragon was assaulting women at their (and his) place of work.
Also: If you can't stop assaulting women you are a threat to society.17 -
-
Not every offender should be locked in their basement for the rest of their lives because they are an inherent threat to society.
So we should let anyone that is an inherent threat to society run free to cause any harm they choose? I agree not every offender should be locked away. However, those who are an inherent threat and continue to cause harm repeatedly with no remorse for their actions should be.
5 -
You should if it affects other employees. No one should be made to feel unsafe at work due to their coworkers.9 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »Not every offender should be locked in their basement for the rest of their lives because they are an inherent threat to society.
So we should let anyone that is an inherent threat to society run free to cause any harm they choose? I agree not every offender should be locked away. However, those who are an inherent threat and continue to cause harm repeatedly with no remorse for their actions should be.
I don't disagree. My point was simply that not all offenders should be treated exactly the same - not every one IS an inherent threat.
Maybe this is the piece missing from my original post - I'm not saying where A.A. does or should fall in the range of offenders (i.e. an apology and some remorse is good enough up through locked away forever). I don't know enough about the details to make that judgement.0 -
How would I be bringing the company into disrepute if the company is unaffected???
The point I was making is that people do, and sometimes should, lose their jobs and income for much much smaller things than repeated sexual assault.
But to go with that point anyway, if I do not make it known anywhere that I work for my company and someone spots me writing anti-semetic or racists screeds all over the internet then yeah, I think it's okay for me to be fired for that. Because that's hate speech, which is a crime, like sexual assault.5 -
The point I was making is that people do, and sometimes should, lose their jobs and income for much much smaller things than repeated sexual assault.
I don't disagree.
I'll back out of this thread for a bit... I'm not sure if I'm not expressing myself well, not reading well, or if my perspective is just that far out line.
0 -
I am troubled today to learn about some very disturbing accusations against one of the most influential figures in the fitness and nutrition industry: Alan Aragon.
https://deadspin.com/how-celebrity-nutritionist-alan-aragon-used-his-status-1828684798
This is a person that has contributed greatly to the field by championing a scientific approach that relies on evidence-based information and objective reasoning in an industry that is flooded with charlatans and snake-oil salesman.
Alan will likely face a major personal downfall over this, but no doubt he will eventually continue to produce valuable science to the field. Is it moral to contribute to an immoral person's financial gain by subscribing to their research reviews, reading their scientific papers, attending their speaking events, following them on social media, etc.? Should their professional insight be shunned so that knowledge is intentionally suppressed due to personal moral objection?
I would like you to look at this through the perspective of these women. They are risking their careers just as well. Some of them just trying to get theirs off the ground.
How many women are feeling suppressed and we are potentially missing everything they are willing to contribute because some entitled man feels like he has the right to grope any woman he wants simply because of his status? How much knowledge is being suppressed by these women?12 -
How would I be bringing the company into disrepute if the company is unaffected???
The point I was making is that people do, and sometimes should, lose their jobs and income for much much smaller things than repeated sexual assault.
But to go with that point anyway, if I do not make it known anywhere that I work for my company and someone spots me writing anti-semetic or racists screeds all over the internet then yeah, I think it's okay for me to be fired for that. Because that's hate speech, which is a crime, like sexual assault.
No, hate speech is not a crime, nor should it be a crime.
As to the original question, the knowledge that has been shown by Aragon is not tainted so the knowledge still stands. The man on the other hand...10 -
Unfortunately, a lot of the people who contributed greatly to our understanding of the world were horrible creeps and in some cases despicably evil people. Who he is does not change the value of what he has already contributed. But it can, and considering his lack of remorse or acknowledgement probably should, affect his ability to be a contributor in the future. Which sucks, because he was really good at it.
Luckily, he wasn't a singular force in the part of the field he was in. And he could probably continue to contribute on a smaller, less public scale. At this point, I certainly wouldn't go anywhere to hear him speak, or directly pay for anything from him, though to be fair, I wasn't doing that anyway. It's tough sometimes to remember that every time you click onto someone's website, you make them more attractive to advertisers.5 -
I can separate facts from opinion so it doesn't change the way I look at the information he provides.
Do I agree with his alleged actions in his personal life? No way, not a chance.
It doesn't make his information / research less credible in any way though. Facts are facts. I might not agree with the way he lives his personal life but I absolutely agree with his work.
I don't idolize celebrities or gurus . I Don't go around trying to follow their personal lives . I always looked at him as a source of information about a topic I am interested in and nothing more.2 -
How would I be bringing the company into disrepute if the company is unaffected???
The point I was making is that people do, and sometimes should, lose their jobs and income for much much smaller things than repeated sexual assault.
But to go with that point anyway, if I do not make it known anywhere that I work for my company and someone spots me writing anti-semetic or racists screeds all over the internet then yeah, I think it's okay for me to be fired for that. Because that's hate speech, which is a crime, like sexual assault.
No, hate speech is not a crime, nor should it be a crime.
As to the original question, the knowledge that has been shown by Aragon is not tainted so the knowledge still stands. The man on the other hand...
?
It's a crime where I live.3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions