William Marvel: Periexpertitis

In 1912, a judge from Ontario published a satirical article in a Canadian medical journal in which he examined the symptoms and etiology of two new diseases he had identified. The first malady, expertitis, manifested itself in the fury of the expert witness whose opinion has been questioned under cross-examination, and it worsened with the effectiveness of the questioning. It became most pronounced when two such experts offered diametrically opposite opinions on the same subject, and the questioner was able to pit them against each other. Expertitis tended to afflict everyone else in the vicinity with periexpertitis, the symptoms of which consisted mainly of intense irritation with the supercilious airs of the indignant experts as they tried to enlighten the groundlings.

I was reminded of that when I read the letter of Victor Lazaron, “M.D., Ph.D.” (March 11), who took offense that I dared wonder whether our reactions to emergencies are determined by the intensity of media attention. Not the informative type of journalism such as last Tuesday’s Sun provided, mind you, but the sensational news more often associated with televised outlets — the focus on such obtuse behavior as fighting over toilet paper, hand sanitizer and face masks.