On Tuesday evening, Pablo Motos interviewed footballer Marcos Llorente, who is promoting his book on health. It is a publication with a zen aesthetic, as if it were a select edition by a famous artist. Llorente, beyond being an effective soldier for Simeone at Atlètic de Madrid, has become famous for his extravagant theories about the functioning of the human body and well-being. He promotes glasses with yellow and red lenses for stories about melatonin that the scientific community has rejected. The player gave a pair of glasses to the presenter and the plush ants to promote their use. Motos prodded the footballer to repeat his theories about sun exposure, even though he knew they had provoked the indignation of oncologists and dermatologists. Llorente advised against the use of sunscreens because he claimed that the sun does not harm the skin. He stated that it had not been proven that sun exposure over the years could cause cancer. The argument was delirious: “And how do they measure this?”, he asked. And he insisted that it was impossible to know if skin cancer was a result of the sun or any other unhealthy habit. Obviously, Pablo Motos did not know how to refute him, because he lacks the knowledge and did not even prepare himself. Therefore, during prime time and in front of a family audience, a leading program once again gave space and voice to a denier with esoteric theses, selling them as healthy advice.Llorente is perceived, by a large part of the viewers, as an aspirational and authoritative figure. It is pathetic, but it is so. Characters of success and great purchasing power who consider themselves role models or examples to follow. Television often plays at the equidistant farce of "all opinions are respectable", but some are not because they attack public health. On scientific issues, not all opinions are respectable. The approach of "it cannot be proven" or "how do they know" in a context without any expert is a trap. For the charlatan, it serves to feign rational skepticism, a kind of critical thinking, when in reality he takes advantage of the absence of an authority to sow doubt without having to provide any proof. He uses doubt to discredit medical evidence when there is no one in front of him who can explain it from science. On the other hand, no one asks Llorente to be the one to prove his theories. He has enough with defending them from boastfulness, giving wellness advice for the rich with idle lives: "You have to expose yourself to the sun progressively from dawn", says the clever one.Audiovisual media reward dissidence because it generates virality, controversy and so-called engagement. That's why this worrying obsession with giving space to deniers. For Motos, sun exposure and creams are irrelevant. He wants the digital world to highlight the blunder the next day, without considering that it is of great social irresponsibility. In any case, in private, Llorente and all those who flatter him can roast themselves in the sun as much as they want. Onward with their convictions.
