View Single Post
Old 11th December 2020, 11:32 AM   #2
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 87,885
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Until there's more than anecdotes, it is proper to say "no effect."

Exceptions prove rules.

What this means is if it is given to a patient, there had better be an explanation for why that (potentially) a review board of fellow doctors would agree made sense at that time, with the information that was available.

This is a sensible way of approaching medical best practices. Rules exist for standard procedure (and can be updated), while allowing for specific circumstances, while also insuring that questionable (or outright poor) decisions can be challenged, disciplined, learned from, and added to the data.
You ignored my point. First off, we know the principle. Second the tests claiming the drugs don't work ignored the manufacturers' directions in how to use the drug.

You can't claim the two drugs don't work if you didn't properly test the drugs.

You can claim the evidence is insufficient to decide if the drugs work or not. But you can't claim they don't work!!!!! Which was my ******* point.

Honestly, the knee jerk oversimplified crap posts when, OMG, the word anecdote is used suggests some people aren't reading past that single word. Failure to understand the importance of anecdotal evidence, especially in medicine, is a bit of Dunning Kruger. There is valid and invalid anecdotal evidence. It helps to understand the difference.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 11th December 2020 at 11:41 AM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top