Yeah, that's my bad. I meant to say data, not evidence. But you'll note that I didn't weight the quality of it. Anecdotes (plural) are data points, interpretati

Yeah, that's my bad. I meant to say data, not evidence. But you'll note that I didn't weight the quality of it. Anecdotes (plural) are data points, interpretation of them is left to whomever wants to use said data. A temperature sensor that you know isn't desiged to work at subzero is reporting -30 consistently. It may be -40 or -20 but you know it's below zero. Someone reporting symptom relief from depression, (which is something who's most severe symptoms are by definition subjective,) after taking psilocybin is a good data point. It without a doubt has helped. Why, how, and discovery of caveats notwithstanding; it's something worthy of understanding, and with anecdotes (plural) consideration for use * . Just because the picture is incomplete, doesn't devalue the existing data points. Which is the thing I was trying to push back on. My data points may be weak, or noisy. But my data points are worth more than your scepticism. Full disclosure, I'm a card carrying sceptic saying that. I always think there's more to be understood, but merely devaluing the data points you currently have is not the way to go about it. Ask questions, don't raise complaints. * : some restrictions apply