A few words about the inflammatory phrase "conspiracy theory" used to denigrate someone's judgement.
In the case of references to manufacturing companies that rely on the privilege of intellectual property (patents & ingredients) protections it would seem justified for them to defend their necessity for secrecy in order to maintain their business. It becomes problematic however and even suspicious when such manufacturers go to great lengths to silence critics or claims of negligence—much like a tyrant disposes of the opposition.
One might wish to compare the board room too to a cabal as it regularly meets to manage their financial future.
Whom else other than social media shall we appeal to with our conjecture? Is it surprising one might "go there"?
How else does one test his/her uncomfortable observations? Or must we reveal our suspicions at all if not to excavate similar or contrary observations of others? Can these attempts to expose some hidden truths result in anything other than retribution? Ridicule would appear to be the most common result when conspicuous circumstances stand alone without direct causal evidence to support allegations of corruption or harmful intrigue.
It would seem both the alleged criminal minds and the supposed "theorists" are in a state of mutual hyperbole and mischaracterization.
Sadly, misleading connotations and foul intent are everywhere monkey-wrenching the many public debates with their steely implements provided conveniently by the logical fallacy tool-box—worse still is how deeply embedded in American privileged culture is this worship of elitist institutions such that noxious ideas smell of lilac and African violet and sycophants pass as gardeners.
