Why Question the Conventional View of Cellulite?

Dr. Oz’s take on cellulite is right in line with the conventional wisdom.  And by scientific standards, it’s a good theory because it is falsifiable.  It’s common to think that science advances when scientists are able to prove a certain theory is true.  But proving that a theory is true is virtually impossible.  As the famous theoretical physicist, Stephen Hawking, explains, “No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory.”  Even a large body of evidence can equally support conflicting theories.

But a theory can be disproved if a single piece of evidence is incompatible with it.  As a result, scientific progress is more likely to occur when a theory can be proven false, not when it is proven true.  For this reason, intelligence analysts are trained to look for disconfirming evidence when evaluating a hypothesis.  With this in mind, ANALYST set out to uncover disconfirming evidence of Dr. Oz’s claim that cellulite is harmless, genetic, and ultimately untreatable.

Having already consulted The Oprah Show, ANALYST naturally turned to that other modern mecca of earthly wisdom.  On websites and blogs all over the Internet, women were raving about the miraculous powers of dry brushing for cellulite reduction.  It’s hard to imagine how brushing the surface of the skin could have any effect on cellulite, but after reading through a preponderance of anecdotal evidence (and because it was cheap), ANALYST decided to give dry brushing a try.

ANALYST will save the details about dry brushing for a later post, but suffice it to say, after just two weeks of daily dry brushing, the results were undeniable.  Somehow the simple act of brushing the skin had a direct visual effect on the fat cells.  ANALYST was amazed.  If cellulite is genetic and untreatable, why was dry brushing an effective treatment for it?  After calling all her girlfriends to share the earth-shattering news, she started to ask the next logical question:

Why?