4 ms·

This article feels like it is walking on eggshells of previous controversial topics while also acknowledging the evidence for them. Also this sentence is just

This article feels like it is walking on eggshells of previous controversial topics while also acknowledging the evidence for them. Also this sentence is just strange to me. The whole point of open science is peer review and truth I thought? > An initial rush to respond to the pandemic produced a flood of observational and non-randomized studies in this area, he says, which spread more confusion than illumination. The common "streetlight effect" bias comes to mind: > A policeman sees a drunk man searching for something under a streetlight and asks what the drunk has lost. He says he lost his keys and they both look under the streetlight together. After a few minutes the policeman asks if he is sure he lost them here, and the drunk replies, no, and that he lost them in the park. The policeman asks why he is searching here, and the drunk replies, "this is where the light is". https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Streetlight_effect

jjgreen 3y ago
Also widely told in Applied Mathematics departments, with the police replaced by an applied mathematician and the drunk replaced by a pure mathematician.
elcritch 3y ago
The worst part IMHO was that most of that stuff was backed up by saying “trust the science” and anyone who criticized it was accused of being “anti-science”.
- acuozzo 3y ago
  No, the worst part is the propaganda which forced the medical community to hastily construct a counter-propaganda campaign. The "trust the science" messaging emerged only in response to a tidal wave of nonsense. Do you really think anyone involved wanted to focus on PR rather than the real problem(s) at hand?
  - nradov 3y ago
    Come on. The medical community was never "forced" to do anything. A small minority of the medical community voluntarily abused their positions of trust to overstate the strength of scientific evidence and advocate for public health policies that were never justified on an evidence-based medicine basis. Those miscreants sacrificed their own credibility for no benefit, and what's worse is they caused public blowback in other areas.
swayvil 3y ago
Re eggshells : Speaking as a guy who just got flagmurdered for nothing. No shit.

jjgreen 3y ago

Also widely told in Applied Mathematics departments, with the police replaced by an applied mathematician and the drunk replaced by a pure mathematician.

elcritch 3y ago

The worst part IMHO was that most of that stuff was backed up by saying “trust the science” and anyone who criticized it was accused of being “anti-science”.

acuozzo 3y ago
No, the worst part is the propaganda which forced the medical community to hastily construct a counter-propaganda campaign. The "trust the science" messaging emerged only in response to a tidal wave of nonsense. Do you really think anyone involved wanted to focus on PR rather than the real problem(s) at hand?
- nradov 3y ago
  Come on. The medical community was never "forced" to do anything. A small minority of the medical community voluntarily abused their positions of trust to overstate the strength of scientific evidence and advocate for public health policies that were never justified on an evidence-based medicine basis. Those miscreants sacrificed their own credibility for no benefit, and what's worse is they caused public blowback in other areas.

swayvil 3y ago

Re eggshells : Speaking as a guy who just got flagmurdered for nothing. No shit.