This synthesis argues that effective debunking must prioritize **mental model replacement** over mere factual correction. The six sources explored the persistence of myths, even after correction.
The core challenge in debunking is not simply presenting facts, but overcoming the initial cognitive fluency of the myth. "Familiarity can be mistaken for truth, making repeated myths harder to dislodge" 1. The strategic deployment of a credible, memorable **alternative narrative** is paramount (Source 4).
The most effective debunking strategies prioritize the replacement of the original mental model with a new, complete model that fills the explanatory gap, preventing the myth's core narrative from reasserting itself.
Analysis of the chosen debunker, Dr. Susan Smith, focusing on her "detox tea" post.
This artifact directly debunks the common myth that "even trace amounts of a chemical are toxic." It uses an interactive data slider to visually teach the conceptual difference between **Hazard** and **Risk**.
This claim ignores the critical concept of **dose**. Let’s visually compare the toxic dose to typical human exposure.
Fact-Check Guidance:
Drag the slider to initiate the debunking sequence and reveal the safety margin.
Everything is a chemical. The myth confuses **Hazard** (what *could* cause harm) with **Risk** (the *probability* of harm based on exposure).
[Specific Fallacy Explanation will appear here.]
1. Which substance is harmful at the lowest *acute* dose relative to its common usage?
2. What is the fundamental conceptual error being addressed by the Dose Principle?