You’re scrolling through TikTok and see a "wellness guru" claiming that drinking raw potato juice cures insomnia. Or maybe your uncle sends a frantic WhatsApp message about a secret government tax on sunshine. Your first instinct? You probably take it with a grain of salt.
It’s an old phrase. Ancient, actually. But in a world where deepfakes are becoming indistinguishable from reality and influencers get paid to tell you that a $500 crystal will "align your vibrations," this bit of linguistic fossil remains your best defense mechanism.
Why do we say it, though? Honestly, the history is weirder than you’d think. It isn’t just about being a little bit cynical. It’s about survival.
Where "Take It With a Grain of Salt" Actually Came From
Pliny the Elder. That’s the guy. Back in 77 A.D., this Roman naturalist and philosopher wrote Naturalis Historia. In it, he described the discovery of a recipe for an antivenom. Legend has it that King Mithridates VI of Pontus was so terrified of being poisoned that he developed a "universal antidote."
The recipe? It was a mix of nuts, figs, and rue. But there was one specific instruction that stayed with us: it had to be taken addito salis grano. With a grain of salt.
The idea was that the salt helped the medicine go down, or perhaps more literally, that the salt acted as a small catalyst for the antidote. Fast forward a few thousand years, and by the 17th century, the English language had swallowed the phrase whole. It stopped being about literal poison and started being about figurative poison—the kind found in a lie or an exaggeration.
Basically, if you’re told something hard to swallow, you need that grain of salt to make it digestible. Or to help you spit it out.
The Modern Crisis of Truth
We are currently drowning in information but starving for wisdom. That’s a cliché, sure, but it’s true.
When you read a headline today, you aren't just reading facts. You’re reading an algorithm's attempt to make you angry or excited enough to click. This is where the habit to take it with a grain of salt becomes a literal mental health requirement.
🔗 Read more: Monroe Central High School Ohio: What Local Families Actually Need to Know
Look at the "replication crisis" in psychology. For decades, we believed certain things about human behavior because of famous studies. Then, researchers tried to do the studies again. They couldn't get the same results. Brian Nosek and the Center for Open Science found that a huge chunk of published social science couldn't be replicated.
If the scientists have to be skeptical of each other, you definitely need to be skeptical of a random infographic on Instagram.
The Problem With "Common Sense"
People often say they use common sense to filter through the noise. But common sense is often just a collection of prejudices we've gathered over time.
If you see a news story that perfectly fits your political worldview, your brain wants to believe it immediately. You don't want the salt. You want the whole shaker. But that’s exactly when you need to be most careful. Confirmation bias makes us drop our guard.
Real skepticism isn't about being a jerk who believes in nothing. It’s about delayed gratification. It’s saying, "That sounds interesting, but I’ll wait for a second source before I let it change my mind."
The Science of Why We Get Fooled
Our brains are lazy. Evolutionarily speaking, thinking is expensive. It burns calories.
Daniel Kahneman, the Nobel Prize-winning psychologist who wrote Thinking, Fast and Slow, describes this as System 1 and System 2 thinking. System 1 is fast, instinctive, and emotional. It’s the part of you that sees a "Limited Time Offer" and feels a pang of anxiety. System 2 is slower, more deliberative, and logical.
When you fail to take it with a grain of salt, you're stuck in System 1. You're reacting. You're not analyzing.
💡 You might also like: What Does a Stoner Mean? Why the Answer Is Changing in 2026
Advertisers know this. They use "social proof"—like those "9 out of 10 dentists" stats that are often based on incredibly specific, skewed surveys—to bypass your System 2. They want you to accept the information as a "given" so you don't do the hard work of questioning the sample size.
How to Apply Healthy Skepticism Without Becoming a Conspiracy Theorist
There is a fine line here.
On one side, you have the person who believes everything they read. On the other, you have the person who believes nothing, not even the things that are demonstrably true. Both are dangerous.
Healthy skepticism means looking at the incentives.
- Who is telling me this? Is it a journalist with a track record? A scientist with peer-reviewed data? Or someone trying to sell me a subscription to their "Patriot Supplement" line?
- What do they gain if I believe them? Sometimes it's money. Sometimes it's just "clout" or engagement.
- Is the language designed to make me feel something? If a "report" uses words like "SHOCKING," "TRAVESTY," or "UNBELIEVABLE," it’s probably time to reach for the salt.
Real information is usually boring. It’s nuanced. It has caveats like "more research is needed" or "the data suggests but does not prove." If someone sounds 100% certain about a complex global event, they’re either lying or they’re oversimplifying.
The Influencer Trap
Let's talk about the lifestyle industry. We see a creator with a perfect kitchen and glowing skin. They tell us their secret is a specific brand of organic celery juice.
We want to believe there’s a shortcut.
But you have to take it with a grain of salt because you don't see the lighting, the filters, or the fact that they might have spent $10,000 on professional skin treatments last month. The celery juice is just the thing that’s "monetizable."
📖 Related: Am I Gay Buzzfeed Quizzes and the Quest for Identity Online
The truth is usually that the person has great genetics, lots of money, and a full-time chef. But "Be Born Wealthy" isn't a great brand strategy.
Practical Steps for Daily Life
You don't need a PhD to be a better consumer of information. You just need a few "red flag" triggers.
Next time you see a claim that feels too good (or too bad) to be true, try this:
- Check the source's "About" page. If it’s a news site you’ve never heard of, see who owns it. Many "local" news sites are actually part of massive partisan networks.
- Reverse image search. If a photo looks suspicious, right-click it. You might find it’s actually from a protest in a different country five years ago.
- Look for the counter-argument. If you find yourself agreeing too much, Google the opposite view. Even if you don't change your mind, you'll see where the holes in the story might be.
The goal isn't to be a cynic who ruins every dinner party conversation. It’s to be someone who isn't easily manipulated.
Taking things with a grain of salt keeps your mental map of the world accurate. If your map is wrong, you're going to get lost.
Moving Forward With Clarity
Developing this habit takes time. It’s a muscle. At first, it’s annoying to double-check things. It’s much more fun to just get outraged or excited.
But once you start noticing the "salt" in your information diet, you’ll find you have much less anxiety. You won't be as worried about every new "crisis" or "miracle" because you’ll know that most things are exaggerated.
Your Actionable Insight Strategy:
- The 24-Hour Rule: If you see a piece of news that makes you want to immediately share it or buy something, wait 24 hours. Most "viral" stories fall apart or lose their sting within a day.
- The Multi-Source Check: Never rely on a single platform for your reality. If you see it on X, look for it on a major news wire like Reuters or AP. If it isn't there, it might just be noise.
- Audit Your Feed: Unfollow accounts that consistently post "rage-bait" or unsubstantiated claims. Your peace of mind is worth more than their engagement numbers.
The phrase might be 2,000 years old, but the wisdom is more relevant today than Pliny could have ever imagined. Keep your salt handy. Use it often. Stay sharp.