exception as adults for magical thinking and willingness to believe because she is someone we trust , a familiar woman , possibly not unlike our own mother or grandmother . Even if the solution offered does not produce desired results , we assume a lack of intent to harm and , hence , a willingness to trust , and possibly circulate , the information further .
My mother , a high school mathematics teacher who , despite possessing an ability to converse with anyone for literal hours , was not much on any combination of information that did not produce a clear , verifiable and correct solution to a problem . I was not likely to get a “ wives ’ tale ” solution from her . In the same vein , the many women in my medical school class at the University of Louisville , the first class with a majority of women , seemed similarly unlikely to suggest “ wives ’ tales ” as solutions . I recall my female classmates , and imagine with great confidence , that they would balk at the term “ wives ’ tales ” and any suggestion they held the proverbial sword for retelling gossipy anecdotes of unproven solutions based solely on their gender and marital status . Ultimately , the gender stereotyping at play in the term is hopelessly outdated and incorrectly reflects sources of unproven information in our contemporary society . Regardless of the source , trusting in quaint and comforting ideas , someone for what they represent and not who they truly are , or a notion that social standing is a reasonable substitute for real experience is fraught with pitfalls . In truth , “ wives ’ tales ” are not just told by wives , they are told by people of all genders . Taken one step farther , when tales are not told by grapevine , nor by chatting women at all , but by men and women in positions of authority , particularly positions replete with sanctity in our collective hearts , the risk is amplified . When do “ wives ’ tales ” cross the line and become misinformation ? Is it based on the seriousness of the subject matter ? Or , is it the seriousness of the potential adverse outcome ?
I find in practice that I spend a great deal of time dispelling “ wives ’ tales ” and misinformation . A current and timely example are the calls I am fielding in the office from patients who are requesting , and sometimes demanding , a supply of hydroxychloroquine to treat a potential COVID-19 infection . The treatment has been touted by the current president without adequate evidence but supported by tweets and retweets of sources he finds comforting and trustworthy . He has even admitted that he has taken the drug himself to prevent COVID-19 infection . I , thus far , have declined to prescribe the drug for COVID-19 based on insufficient current data to support the use of the medication and the potential side effects . I provide my patients a copy of the July 21 , 2020 Annals of Internal Medicine Summary of the current data with clear recommendations not to use this drug as a treatment or prophylaxis for COVID-19 . Can
URBAN LEGENDS IN MEDICINE we distinguish this “ presidential tale ” from that of a “ wives ’ tale ?” The president is certainly not a wife , but he does meet the criteria for a purveyor of a “ wives ’ tale ,” a person in a position of trust ( at least an electoral college majority of trust ), who represents in his office an ideal or place of comfort , providing anecdotal or unproven recommendations . The intent may not be to harm , but certainly in this instance , therein lies great potential to harm .
This ability to provide unproven recommendations certainly does not lie solely with the president but can be true for any of us . We now have social media to amplify any tale we may want to tell based on our anecdotal experiences , and this platform can prove to be positively intoxicating to the narcissist in us all . I read with interest the very recent op-ed in the New York Times by Drs . Seema Yasmin and Craig Spencer titled : ‘ But I Saw It on Facebook ’: Hoaxes Are Making Doctors ’ Jobs Harder . Drs . Yasmin and Spencer highlight an August 2020 report by Avaaz revealing the pervasiveness of misinformation on Facebook . The numbers are staggering . The report documents hundreds of millions of views of health misinformation on Facebook in April 2020 alone . Views of misinformation on Facebook in the same month outpaced views of trusted sites , such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization , by a factor of 10 . The authors note , “ Facebook ’ s algorithm rewards and encourages engagement with content that provokes strong emotions .”
“ Wives ’ tales ” can hold the same luster by utilizing strong emotions and trust in a source regardless of intent . The line between misinformation and innocent “ wives ’ tales ” has become inseparably blurred and arguably hastened by social media amplification .
The year 2020 has not brought us much that is quaint and comforting , and “ wives ’ tales ” can seem a reassuring counterpoint to the times . Maybe in the right setting and time , the tales can reclaim their past innocence . However , in the current polarized climate in our society , a climate hastened by a barrage of online information that can be tailored to your “ likes ,” the innocence of any tale can easily fade . In our world of medicine , “ wives ’ tales ” are , at worst , stereotyped misinformation with gender specific liability that can delay medical treatment or adversely affect treatment . More broadly , at best , they may have just simply lost their allure .
Dr . Kolter is a practicing internist with Baptist Health .
OCTOBER 2020 7