3 ms·

Would I trust it? No. However, I'm also not going to dismiss it out of hand just because of where it comes from or who is funding it. That is anti-intellectu

Would I trust it? No. However, I'm also not going to dismiss it out of hand just because of where it comes from or who is funding it. That is anti-intellectual tribalism. All researchers have bias, some much more severe than others. The existence of bias does not invalidate their research. Rather, the manifestation of it does, and that is determined by critically analyzing it and exposing where it has warped the research.

HarryHirsch 8y ago
When Big Tobacco funded its studies they were never interested in the long-term consequences of smoking for health, their goal was to continue in business as always, and the public health folks were bad for business. It was never an honest engagement, the pro-tobacco side engaged in obfuscation. This is now a well-known, documented historical fact: https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/ https://www.industrydocumentslibrary.ucsf.edu/tobacco/ In the realm of politics it's foolish not to take someone's motivation into account and assume they are interested in an honest debate. Pointing this out isn't "anti-intellectual tribalism".