3 ms·
I read the blame differently but I don't agree that the physicians are at fault here either. The article treats the researchers' opinion as if it was unquestio
by SamAtt 17y ago
I read the blame differently but I don't agree that the physicians are at fault here either. The article treats the researchers' opinion as if it was unquestionably correct. The researchers said x wouldn't work and this person tried it so they are ignoring science.
But the researchers are no more qualified to interpret their results than another clinical researcher specializing in the field (the whole point of a research paper is to present what you found not interpret it for the audience). If someone else thinks x might work and they are backed by their own research and a physician who makes sure it isn't dangerous than I don't see the problem.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- antipaganda 17y agoYou don't see a problem with using autistic children as guinea-pigs for experimental treatment, based on nothing more than a preliminary study? In many of these cases, the study itself warns against using it as the basis for any sort of treatment! Also, there's no double-blinding. Hello placebo effect!