Posted by bob on May 20, 2000, at 0:44:14
In reply to Re: Editorial Concern, Too, posted by Adam on May 19, 2000, at 23:49:32
> ... It's wrong to go
> around saying "Prozac KILLS! Lily is run by Nazis!" but it might be equally wrong to say
> "Any such claim that (treatment) caused X is patently absurd." I don't see how we could
> have enough information to make such a definitive statement.That's because you're not cynical enough about scientists. ;^)
Call it skepticism instead, and you'll wind up with a hallmark value of Science-as-we-know-it. My problem isn't with Science, but how it's practiced.
> I suspect the lack of a moderate public stance on many of these issues has more to do with
> politics and economics than science...It also has a lot to do with the difference between medicine and public health. Doctors deal with individuals. Good ones know that statistics do not apply to individuals (they apply to populations), and so statistical results are a guide and not a rule. On the other hand, public health DOES deal with populations. Well-documented and replicated stats are the law, not the rule. I've known smokers who lived out their long lives to succumb to something totally unrelated to their habit. I know long-time recreational drug users who haven't ruined their lives. I've known teens who've had unprotected sex and managed to avoid both pregnancy and disease. But if I was some public health official, do you think I'd publically admit to any of that?
Not on your life!
(well, on anyone's life for that matter, since that'd be a threat to, well, public health.)
cheers,
bob
poster:bob
thread:33082
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20000517/msgs/34090.html