While medical reversal is more frequent than that of physics, the previous observations are still true, but may represent outliers, or regress to the mean. Hence the need for replication. Short of fraud, the data remain true, but our understanding of them expands.
-
-
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @jorient and
Now how in the hell *one observation* would reverse a mature medical theory, which we know are highly dependent on replication, is beyond me and reflects ignorance about how the medical literature functions and appropriate skepticism of new results (as Ioannidis’ emphasizes).
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @jorient and
An actual skeptical physician, hearing of a single observation that contradicted a mature finding, replicated, eg for vaccines, in billions of people and thousands of papers, would tell you the far more likely probability is your n=1 observation is garbage.
2 replies 1 retweet 15 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @gorskon and
What if the n = thousands, each and every one dismissed as an anecdote and a coincidence? How about denialism? See brides in the bath case: http://www.jpands.org/vol10no3/miller.pdf …
2 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Yeah your crank journal is evidence of nothing and the article is frankly conspiratorial. Not interested in the QAnon of medicine.
4 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @jorient and
Truths from this thread: 1. Education is not an absolute shield against the seductive allure of idiocy. 2. Medical conspiracy-mongers try to sell the notion that current evidence-based consensus should be regarded with suspicion bcuz understanding of science sometimes changes.
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @SteveTiger999 @jorient and
Yes. Clearly a superior system would declare something true and then *never change* no matter where the evidence goes. If it changed it could be fallible right? We can’t have people believing in fallible beliefs! That’s how you get protestants!
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @SteveTiger999 and
You mean like the inquisitorial defenders of the CDC's Holy (and infallible) Vaccine Schedule?
6 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jorient @MarkHoofnagle and
Except that the vaccine schedule changes almost every year due to new evidence. You really aren't very good at this, are you?
4 replies 0 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
the number of shots keeps growing and growing. And for most the dose is the same regardless of patient weight and age. Only size of needle changes. Any other pediatric drugs like that? One size fits all.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Oh, goody. The "too many too soon" gambit, coupled with an extreme misunderstand of how vaccines work. How did you get through medical school and residency again?
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.