Hi HN,

The indefatigable avalanche of conflicting information around COVID is becoming too much to bear, though this problem is not unique to the current circumstance. I am curious, what is your personal method for validating information on topics that you are unfamiliar with? For example, I am comfortable, like many of you, with topics relating to computing/technology and with some spare time can dig into a paper and perform at least a cursory examination of it’s methodology and findings. When I face the same problem but instead on a complex subject in virology or biology, I do the best that I can, checking the logic wherever possible but there is still much field specific knowledge I do not possess.

So what do you do, especially when faced with two pieces of conflicting information in an unfamiliar field? Do you defer to certain public or private institutions that are comprised of experts in the field? Do you choose to side with the information that has the largest number of experts agreeing with the presented conclusions? How can I, a layman, even adequately evaluate the credentials and past publications of a researcher?

I feel like I have fallen into a rabbit hole. Who to trust?