4 ms·

They did a follow up randomized experiment where people jumped out of planes (at 2ft) with and without parachutes. https://healthjournalism.org/blog/2019/02/br

• jraph 5y ago
  This is the first time I hear about this issue. > We think that everyone might benefit if the most radical protagonists of evidence based medicine organised and participated in a double blind, randomised, placebo controlled, crossover trial of the parachute. I wasn't expecting this. My reaction to what I understood as "Need solid studies? Nobody's preventing you to go kill yourselves to make your point, be our guests, the world will be better without you anyway!" was: what? this can't be serious. This is indeed not serious as your link outlines: > Obviously the first parachute study was tongue-in-cheek, but the authors’ point was important: The absence of randomized controlled trials for a certain medical intervention does not mean that the intervention cannot be safe and effective. And an RCT often would be unethical, as I noted in a past blog on the “tyranny of the RCT.” Sometimes, well-designed observational studies must suffice. This is well done. Okay, I have my shot of serious fun for the day, let's go back to work.
• 3np 5y ago
  https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094 https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094