As long as that’s true, the case for high standards is a lot more sympathetic. Crappy studies are, indeed, crappy, and rarely worth betting a patient’s health on.
-
Show this thread
-
But take a different extreme, for perspective. It’s totally legal to write a blog post saying “this drug worked for me!” The fact that this is legal tells you *nothing* about how much credence to put in the post. Free speech doesn’t come with a quality guarantee.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
It’s possible that if we allow more crappy studies *and amp up skepticism accordingly* there will be valuable signal amid the noise. Signal that we’re not allowed to generate today.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread -
I actually *agree* with
@Dereklowe that most attempts to make medicines that bypass the regulatory system are crap. And I appreciate his work in explaining to the public *why* they’re crap.1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
The *ethical* position I take (which I know most people don’t agree with) is that you have a right & responsibility to decide for yourself what is crap. And if you want to take risks with your own health, that’s your business.
5 replies 3 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @s_r_constantin
This is the same kind of argument people use to say seatbelt laws are bad. However, the gen pop is many orders of magnitude less equipped to decide what is crap and what isn't in clinical studies than searbelts. It's absolutely unethical to let people make that decision
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Chem_Walker @s_r_constantin
Mainly because snake oil salesmen will 100 % abuse that decision. We already see that with people like "Drs" Oz and Phil.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Chem_Walker
Right, that’s a values difference and I don’t expect to change your mind. I brought it up to distinguish between the positive & the normative.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @s_r_constantin @Chem_Walker
On empirical questions, even people with different values can learn from each other and change their minds. I’d be willing to change *my* mind on empirical questions and expect you would too.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @s_r_constantin
I'll respond to this even though it comes across as quite condescending: Yes obviously I would and do, that's the whole point of being a scientist and doing science.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Wasn’t my intent to condescend. I don’t know everyone on Twitter and can’t always judge what is & isn’t obvious to people I don’t know.
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.