Reflection

The Magic Pill Reaction Paper Raver De Guzman | PE 101 K In “The Magic Pill”, the ketogenic diet’s effectiveness was justified through inputs of medical professionals, scientists, indigenous groups, and experiences of common people. While the diet is in itself problematic, the documentary broadens the problem further by implying it as the one-size-fits-all solution to most medical problems.

As with our discussions in PHYED, going on a diet against our free will is always bound to become futile. We humans are biologically wired to eat — we need food and we deserve food. Restricting the quantity and quality of our food may give us our weight goals in the short term, but this would eventually become unsustainable. Logically, the body that is being depleted of nutrients will retaliate against our willpower — the result is either withdrawal from the diet or health complications. Indeed, the best strategy for a healthy weight is something that balances our free will and need for nutrients. This can be achieved through responsible portioning.

The ketogenic diet is problematic because it goes against the aforementioned mantra of free will. By going on this diet, the person is practically forced through a new lifestyle that is not tailored to his needs or wants — instead, it is something imposed upon him. This only sets the stage for the body’s retaliation. Additionally, the scientific effectiveness of the ketogenic diet is still blurry at present. There has been no solid consensus yet among medical professionals and scientists as to whether the ketogenic diet is indeed healthy and efficacious. The documentary erred gravely in featuring only people that are supportive of the diet — as a result, the illusion of the diet’s firm scientific basis was created.

As explained above, the documentary was guilty of heavy confirmation bias.

Yet its horizon of fallacy extends further than that. For as the video progressed, it seemed evident that the ketogenic diet is being presented not just as a weight loss regimen, but as a miracle drug. One prime example is the case of the autistic child

who seemed to have felt better after going on the said diet. By communicating bold claims like this to a large audience, the documentary’s fault transforms from ignorance to fraud.

The ketogenic diet is simply a diet — it contains no pharmaceutical compounds scientifically proven to cure disease. Autism, for one, is a very complex disorder, and it is something that scientists are still trying to decipher how to cure.

Certainly, eating a fat-rich diet would not be a solution for this disorder. The fact that the child featured got better over the course of the film conveys a misleading message to the audience that the ketogenic diet is effective in alleviating autism. In reality, the improvement in the child’s condition may just be a placebo effect, or the parents may just be guilty of confirmation bias out of their desperation for a cheaper treatment alternative. The bottom line here is that diets designed for weight loss should just stay within the realm of weight loss. If an attempt is done to extend a diet’s purpose beyond what the science intends, there are bound to be ethical repercussions and serious futility.

In conclusion, the “Magic Pill” errs by presenting the ketogenic diet in a grand spotlight without considering other medical perspectives. Diet-wise, portioning can be argued to be the healthier choice. Beyond the topic of diets, keto’s exact benefits remain indeterminate. Unfortunately, in the process of glorifying the ketogenic diet, the film became ignorant and self-serving — to the point of being fraudulent. It seems that there may be no magic pill after all.