4 ms·

> Is there "no evidence" that using a parachute helps prevent injuries when jumping out of planes? This was the conclusion of a cute paper in the BMJ The BMJ p

> Is there "no evidence" that using a parachute helps prevent injuries when jumping out of planes? This was the conclusion of a cute paper in the BMJ The BMJ paper doesn't say there was no evidence! The paper explicitly says there was anecdotal evidence. Here's the relevant quote from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/ : ] The perception that parachutes are a successful intervention is based largely on anecdotal evidence. Observational data have shown that their use is associated with morbidity and mortality, due to both failure of the intervention1,2 and iatrogenic complications.3 In addition, “natural history” studies of free fall indicate that failure to take or deploy a parachute does not inevitably result in an adverse outcome.4 > Their [the BMJ authors'] point was that "evidence" isn't the same thing as "peer-reviewed journal articles". How does Astral Codex Ten draw this conclusion? The phrase "peer-review" doesn't exist in the BMJ article. The point of the paper is that observational studies should not be rejected out-of-hand. Observational studies can be and are peer-reviewed. > Is there "no evidence" for alien abductions? Some of the circled headlines used "no evidence" or even "'Exactly zero' evidence." But others used "no hard evidence" and "no clear evidence", which are higher bars. So, yes, there is evidence of alien abductions, but quoting an article I found using Google Scholar, it's well characterized as: "With so little hard evidence to support anything having to do with aliens on Earth — in fact, essentially no evidence outside personal testimony" - https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/journeys.dartmouth.edu/dist/a/1604/files/2020/12/Psych-7-Essay-3.pdf https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/journeys.dartmouth.edu/dist/a/... (It then points out other psychological mechanisms which might explain the evidence, ending "Whether their stories are true or not, their trauma is very real, and it deserves to be treated as such.") > Is there "no evidence" homeopathy works? Sure, there's evidence. But there's also counter-evidence. Is there stronger evidence that homeopathy works than there there was evidence that COVID-19 could spread through the air-con system? Probably. So how is this example supposed to help make the author's point? > Here we should reject journal articles because they disagree with informal evidence! Q: What is the basis of the author's informal evidence? A: "a strong theoretical understanding". Q: Where did that strong theoretical understanding come from? A: Published research. So the author is rejecting a journal article because it disagrees with other journal articles, after being watered through public perceptions. That's not informal evidence! > there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil. The author earlier accepted anecdotal evidence of alien abductions as a type of evidence. How is the author so sure there is no anecdotal evidence that snake oil works? It's because of essays like these I avoid substack links.

yorwba 5y ago
>> there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil. > The author earlier accepted anecdotal evidence of alien abductions as a type of evidence. > How is the author so sure there is no anecdotal evidence that snake oil works? The full paragraph reads: If the story is that all the world’s top doctors and scientists believe snake oil doesn’t work, then say so. “Scientists: Snake Oil Doesn’t Work”. This doesn’t have the same faux objectivity as “No Evidence Snake Oil Works”. It centers the belief in fallible scientists, as opposed to the much more convincing claim that there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil. Maybe it would sound less authoritative. Breaking an addiction to false certainty is as hard as breaking any other addiction. But the first step is admitting you have a problem. The author doesn't think there is literally no evidence for snake oil, which is why he argues against the "No Evidence Snake Oil Works" headline. I think that's quite clear if you look at the surrounding context instead of quoting only a fragment.
- eesmith 5y ago
  I don't think I misread it. There absolutely is evidence that could be used in favor of snake oil. A Google Scholar search easily finds: "Inhibition of human fibroblast growth in vitro by a snake oil" - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000712269090159W https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000712... . "Snake oil originally was a Chinese medication rich in omega-3 fatty acids which was made from the Chinese water snake. It was believed to decrease the pain of arthritis." - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-019-1202-1 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-019-1202-1 (also, http://mrarmy.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/101472259/merchants%20and%20Snake%20Oil%20Salesmen.pdf http://mrarmy.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/101472259/merchants%2... ). "Traditional keloid remedies have been in use for generations. The Yoruba of South Western Nigeria, for example, use several methods to reduce the symptoms of keloids. Boa constrictor oil from the snake's visceral fat and ointments of shea butter (from nuts of the Vitellaria paradoxa tree), locally produced in Nigeria, are two commonly used traditional medications. Some patients seen in the authors’ clinics in Osogbo and Ibadan, Nigeria who have been using either shea butter or snake fat, reported observable remission of symptoms and swelling." - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905615/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905615/ Thus, there CANNOT BE A "convincing claim that there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil". (Remember, we're accepting that personal accounts of alien abductions counts as evidence.) Breaking an addiction to false certainty is indeed hard.

yorwba 5y ago

>> there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil. > The author earlier accepted anecdotal evidence of alien abductions as a type of evidence. > How is the author so sure there is no anecdotal evidence that snake oil works? The full paragraph reads: If the story is that all the world’s top doctors and scientists believe snake oil doesn’t work, then say so. “Scientists: Snake Oil Doesn’t Work”. This doesn’t have the same faux objectivity as “No Evidence Snake Oil Works”. It centers the belief in fallible scientists, as opposed to the much more convincing claim that there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil. Maybe it would sound less authoritative. Breaking an addiction to false certainty is as hard as breaking any other addiction. But the first step is admitting you have a problem. The author doesn't think there is literally no evidence for snake oil, which is why he argues against the "No Evidence Snake Oil Works" headline. I think that's quite clear if you look at the surrounding context instead of quoting only a fragment.

eesmith 5y ago
I don't think I misread it. There absolutely is evidence that could be used in favor of snake oil. A Google Scholar search easily finds: "Inhibition of human fibroblast growth in vitro by a snake oil" - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000712269090159W https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/000712... . "Snake oil originally was a Chinese medication rich in omega-3 fatty acids which was made from the Chinese water snake. It was believed to decrease the pain of arthritis." - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-019-1202-1 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-019-1202-1 (also, http://mrarmy.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/101472259/merchants%20and%20Snake%20Oil%20Salesmen.pdf http://mrarmy.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/101472259/merchants%2... ). "Traditional keloid remedies have been in use for generations. The Yoruba of South Western Nigeria, for example, use several methods to reduce the symptoms of keloids. Boa constrictor oil from the snake's visceral fat and ointments of shea butter (from nuts of the Vitellaria paradoxa tree), locally produced in Nigeria, are two commonly used traditional medications. Some patients seen in the authors’ clinics in Osogbo and Ibadan, Nigeria who have been using either shea butter or snake fat, reported observable remission of symptoms and swelling." - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905615/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905615/ Thus, there CANNOT BE A "convincing claim that there is literally not a single piece of evidence anywhere in the world that anyone could use in favor of snake oil". (Remember, we're accepting that personal accounts of alien abductions counts as evidence.) Breaking an addiction to false certainty is indeed hard.