Fortunately not everyone, including scientists, see it that way doctor: https://www.americanscientist.org/blog/from-the-staff/stop-using-the-word-pseudoscience …
-
-
What I mean by "misinformed consent" with respect to quackery is that consent is given on the basis of misinformation, the claim that a pseudoscientific treatment will be efficacious and safe, when there is either no evidence to support that claim or evidence that it causes harm.
-
The adoption of pseudoscience in medicine can't happen without the use of misinformed consent by physicians. This is usually unwitting, because usually the doctor mistakenly believes that the pseudoscience works, but it is misinformed consent nonetheless.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Adding to this
@gorskon is the fact that medical and other professional organizations discipline members who use unproven and dangerous therapies. This is not to ensure ‘conventional’ medicine - it for patient safety. Period. -
Good & so they should. Which is why you should have no problem with those that practice, say, integrative medicine.
- 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.
Does at least show though that your view is not all-pervasive. With the Sci Am author on this one.
'The term lacks a coherent meaning and leads to unnecessary polarization, mistrust, disrespectfulness, and confusion around science issues.'