Probably because writing intellectually honest defenses of contemporary western medicine isn't something that SBM does. All their posts are exactly the same. If

Probably because writing intellectually honest defenses of contemporary western medicine isn't something that SBM does. All their posts are exactly the same. If they were to cover this it would just be one or two semi-coherent paragraphs about Bayesian statistics, followed by a long rant about how even if Tylenol is dangerous it doesn't matter because some random alternative medicine practice that has nothing to do with the topic at hand is the tool of the devil. Every time I read some book that's critical of something from modern medicine I look up what SBM has to say about it. Because after all I'm not a medical researcher, nor am I omniscient. But what I do know is that every time, without fail, SBM has written a 'debunking' of that book that has nothing to do with the actual arguments or evidence from the book. If you like SBM then I would propose that it's because you're not reading the actual books or primary sources they're talking about. So everything they say 'sounds correct', but only because you have no basis for actually judging.