Thus, there are all kinds of opinions that are viable on these two subjects. Not engaging with alternate views in these two cases is politics, not science.
My doctor this morning was pretty stern with me. Lose weight. Exercise, fatass. I'm going to call in a prescription.
I tend to listen to my doctor, particularly when he is mad that I did not follow his directives last time. I listen to him because he is an expert at medicine.
But maybe, even though the doctor's diagnosis is pretty standard for a middle aged American and there is a fair amount of empirical science to back up his professional judgment, I should seek a second opinion?
Should my second opinion come from, say, a climatologist, an engineer, a park manager, a mechanic, or a professor of English?
Maybe, you know, there are some alternative facts. Maybe I see a particular political orientation who repeatedly questions the expertise of doctors. I probably shouldn't take those into account, huh?
You know, I don't want to shut down the conversation, particularly with non-doctors and people who accuse medical personnel of gouging the insurance companies and leading a liberal crusade against Americans' rights to be weight challenged.
