Anyone who insists that "but there are no RCTs" on meat and longevity constitutes an argument needs to take Science 101. Because there never will be a meat and longevity RCT, that argument is tantamount to saying your view is unfalsifiable and thus not a scientific opinion.https://twitter.com/mackinprof/status/1083007940473356288 …
-
-
I should say, *basically impossible without long-term RCTs, which are usually unethical/impossible to perform
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
My criticism holds despite that qualification. In nutrition, falsifying experiments might be impossible, but studies that support the view opposing yours--weakly or strongly--are possible. If you declare that such evidence is irrelevant, you're guilty of the same intellectual sin
-
This is because coming to a conclusion is necessary to make policy. Even action is inaction in policy. Thus, nutrition as an intrinsically applied science demands that one cannot withhold one's opinion as long as one is doing nutrition. Physics is different.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.