3 ms·

Assuming you're going to fix a extremely complex system like the human body by just taking a pill is what some people call the bias of Illusion of Control. htt

• didgeoridoo 2y ago
  You’re going to have to be more specific, because I am sure you are not arguing against the concept of medicine.
  • breck 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • malfist 2y ago
      Try telling a type 1 diabetic patient to eat like it's the 1800s
      • breck 2y ago
        > a type 1 diabetic patient Are you sure there is such a thing?
        • malfist 2y ago
          Yes.
          • breck 2y ago
            And what biological test can one conduct that proves this, and is unchangeable over time?
  • arijo 2y ago
    I argue that medicine still does not have enough accumulated knowledge about the complexity of the human body to be playing God with a single pill.
    • kelseyfrog 2y ago
      You may begin your argument now
    • cyberax 2y ago
      There is no god. So I argue that medicine is at least just as potent as nothing.
    • okaram 2y ago
      Maybe ... maybe not. Modern medicine does have magic pills for many illnesses; for example, antibiotics are magical for many bacterial infections, many vaccines are almost magical too. OTOH, many pills will have undesired side-effects, and the body is in a complex dynamic equilibrium, so it may happen that blocking GLP-1 may have side effects. Eventually, we'll all die, but I'm optimistic that GLP-1 will lead to a better equilibrium. Preliminary evidence says it will. I'm not as confident as the author though :)
    • emptiestplace 2y ago
      You're right, but the way you're going about it isn't.
    • kadoban 2y ago
      Any single pill? Or is your objection specific to this one? (That iirc is actually an injection, not a pill, but w/e)
    • herval 2y ago
      You don’t believe the medicine that billions of people take to treat diseases that would’ve otherwise demonstrably killed them is “accumulated knowledge” enough? From insulin to antibiotics, we have sufficient evidence that many types of medicine DO work. Nobody is “playing god” (whatever that means), it’s just reproducible and consistent data
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• kadoban 2y ago
  Are diabetics biased in this way when they take insulin? Or where is your cutoff? How many average person years does an intervention need to save before it meets your approval?
  • akira2501 2y ago
    Untreated diabetics can die within a week. Are we facing the same sort of problem here?
    • kadoban 2y ago
      No, but same thing with different numbers. Like I asked, where's our cutoff? If obesity on average kills you a couple of decades earlier than otherwise, does treatment for that meet your approval?
      • akira2501 2y ago
        > No, but same thing They're either the same or they're different. > Like I asked, where's our cutoff? Exigency of loss of life. > kills you a couple of decades earlier Staying obese into old age carries risks. There are multiple ways to manage that risk. None of it is as exigent as other conditions. > does treatment for that meet your approval? Universally? No.
        • kadoban 2y ago
          >> Like I asked, where's our cutoff? > Exigency of loss of life. Cool. How about cancer treatment? Some of those you can live with for some months/years. We allowed to treat anyway when the outcomes are better? > Staying obese into old age carries risks. There are multiple ways to manage that risk. None of it is as exigent as other conditions. And why should this not be one of the ways to manage that risk? The biggest difference seems to be that it actually works, on average, unlike some other common treatments like telling people to eat less and exercise more.