Mark, I think a lot of people still believe that acid causes duodenal ulcers simply because 1) it's become folklore, and 2) the bit about H. pylori never has received much media attention. There also have to be a few valid studies conducted to prove a conclusion because sample sizes are often skewed because they're too small to be reliable. Also, occasionally something mucks up the results, such as an aftertaste letting subjects know if they were receiving the drug.

Little Hawk, YES - there are two opposite 'bandwagon' approaches - pro and anti. I think the reason people automatically join one side or the other has a lot to do with the amount of thinking involved in judging each individual issue. The vast majority of human beings will question all sorts of things - except what they think they already know.

Troll, regarding the open mind thing, it's not what gets through there that's ever a problem, it's what I decide to keep. Sure, drive a truck through, but if it runs on water, it's gonna keep going out the other side. Maybe some people err by not letting new ideas in, and others never shovel out the debris.

Harvey, I'd consider you normal^[*], but I do the same thing you do - believe in logic but dream of possibilities and hope they're true. I think the scientists who make the radical breakthroughs must do the same.


^[*] Normal in this sense meaning "not nuts enough to be locked up or avoided at parties."