This is fascinating. Steven Novella and David Gorski wrote an opinion article questioning whether it’s worthwhile to do clinical trials on medical modalities that don’t have any prior scientific plausibility, such as homeopathy and reiki. Basically, it’s an extension of their promotion of science-based medicine (which uses a Bayesian analysis of what we actually know throughout the sciences) versus evidence-based medicine (which just relies on the examination of the evidence in a specific experiment). And they’re getting flack about it – from people who thoroughly misunderstand their position.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Satanic Panic | Sword and Scale™ on ISP #23 – The Satanic Panic
- Randy Raymond on ISP #21 – Scary Ways to Die!!
- ISP #19 – Potluck Skepticism on Irreverent Skeptics Podcast Episode 18 – Science, Bitches!!
- Neil on Irreverent Skeptics Podcast Episode 18 – Science, Bitches!!
- Mike McElroy on Irreverent Skeptics Podcast Episode 18 – Science, Bitches!!
Categories
- Apologetics
- Atheism
- Blog
- Conspiracy
- Drama
- Drunk show
- Favorite Blogs
- food
- health
- internet weirdness
- Movies
- News
- podcast
- Potpourri
- Promo
- Rant
- Religions
- riffs
- Science
- Shit Internet Apologists Say
- Skeptical activism
- Skeptical community
- Skepticism
- Special Guest
- Supernatural
- Theism
- Uncategorized
- Vaccination