Take chocolate, for example.  (Thanks, I'd love to!)  A hefty bar of the normal dark variety contain 15 percent of artery-clogging fat and 200 calories per scant serving.  Those smooth, satisfying squares slip to the hips, and before we can say "Ghirardelli" we could end up as statistics in the latest Battle of the Bulge.

Never mind.  A scientific study has come to the rescue with evidence that chocolate (the darker, the better) is actually good for the heart.  What a relief!  Now I can continue my thrifty practice of snapping up all the left-over chocolate candy for half price at local emporia the day after holidays.  My heart feels better already!

Over the years, science has flip-flopped on its assessment of numerous other foods and drugs.  Eggs used to be, well, bad eggs — dangerously high in cholesterol.  But they have since rolled over into the nutritional plus column as a reasonable source of protein, at least until some other study further confounds us.

Now scientific research has partially absolved us for our more harmful human addictions, suggesting that our lifestyles and habits may, after all, take a back seat to our genetic makeup.  Centuries ago, Shakespeare eloquently pointed out that our faults lay not in the stars, but in ourselves.  Modern science has taken that idea to a deeper level, with evidence that our faults may be part of our genetic makeup.

Overweight people, for instance, may feel less personally responsible now that science has discovered a "genetic disposition" toward obesity.  And there is evidence, as well, that certain smokers have an indefinable component in the genes that addicts them to nicotine, ultimately making them victims of cancer.  Boozing, too, has been linked to genetics.

Scientific exploration of the genome is a new and exciting means of discovering markers that indicate a susceptibility toward certain disorders.  Its important cannot be underestimated, especially as a warning to encourage awareness, vigilance and possible prevention.  But genetic and other medical research never intended to provide a convenient excuse for those who persist in self-destructive habits, such as smoking, bingeing, or taking drugs.

Nor is science a static phenomenon.  In  the field of drug research, the results of one study are routinely debunked by another as more knowledge becomes available. Exaggerated claims made by drug manufacturers have been tempered by the advent of rampant side effects that often prove worse than the original ailment.

The list of consumer caveats has broadened to include symptoms such as shortness of breath, swelling, stuffy nose, runny nose, hives, heartburn, halitosis, headache, infection, sore throat, dizziness, nose bleed, blurry vision, fever, pain, sinus pressure flatulence, incontinence, itching, coughing, nausea, diarrhea, hot flashes, ringing in the ears, constipation, palpitations, muscle weakness ... or worse.  

There are even pills on the market represented as silver bullets to cure our addictions to food, liquor and cigarettes. Unfortunately, they were found to induce suicidal tendencies in those taking them, some of whom are no longer around to attest to their effectiveness.

As grateful as we are for modern science, all the contradictory claims can prove downright confusing.  It's enough to drive one to drink — or at least to nibble nervously on a heartwarming bar of chocolate.

 

---