No surprise. IVF & acupuncture? Doesn't work (but how could it?): https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2681194?redirect=true&utm_source=STAT+Newsletters&utm_campaign=d212c12457-MR&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8cab1d7961-d212c12457-116322369 … "#acupuncture vs sham acupuncture at the time of ovarian stimulation & embryo transfer resulted in no significant difference in live birth rates." @gorskon @EdzardErnst @skepticpedi
-
-
It’s important to be consistent in how we talk about studies. No single study is ever a definitive. Communicating one study as truth is how we got vaccine phobia. That regimen of acupuncture did not work for that outcome in that population. Null hypothesis not rejected.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @usnehal @CaulfieldTim and
IVF itself is a lot of hocus pocus. There are constant individualized changes to treatment regimens, trial of error, “n of 1” interpretation of past cycles in the individual. Little is evidence-based. Let’s not use different standards for trust in IVF vs acupuncture.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Well, let's mix in scientific plausibility (life force energy flowing through meridians) and all the other studies that suggest acupuncture largely placebo theatre... (another recent eg http://cochranelibrary-wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD013010/full …), skepticism seems justified. And onus on those claiming benefit...
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @CaulfieldTim @EdzardErnst and
Exactly right ! Biological plausibility based on current state of scientific knowledge not ancient “wisdom” or pseudoscience postulates. Think of the $ wasted on implausible Zamboni Rx for MS
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @drdavebrooks @CaulfieldTim and
Well, to be devil’s advocate, there was a time that the world being round or landing on the moon seemed “implausible.” In an age of loss of faith in science, valid concerns about peer-review or industry influence or profit motive, scientists need to cultivate more humility.
7 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Evidence is always evolving. We know a fraction of what is true. Instruments/measurement are limited by our own limitations or current knowledge. And much of what we consider true now may or may not remain true. So, let’s just stick to not rejecting the null hypothesis.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
I sense the Galileo gambit here...https://respectfulinsolence.com/2017/03/20/the-galileo-gambit-2017/ …
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.