Many major innovations occurred from individuals experimenting on themselves. In fact, it's one of the few ways to make progress when you have overbearing regulatory agencies.

You should be glad that many enterprising "sample sizes of one" are willing to become anecdata for everyone else. They push the boundaries so that maybe, just maybe, we get the benefits of these advances within our lifetimes rather than after many generations of careful study (ie. too late for me).

Carry on, intrepid experimenters! Some of us appreciate your reckless abandon.

But we can't know from a sample of one whether the placebo effect was in play, or whether the individual's response was atypical.

How do you think humanity learned about new medicines before clinical studies? A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step; or in this case, a single experimenter.

This is also how people learn about the dangers of fan death, how carrots help improve your night vision, and that bulls are enraged by the color red.

Those examples seem super consequential compared to all the medical advancements that we got... I would gladly keep the medical advancements in exchange for turning off fans inside, eating more carrots, and avoiding red around bulls (or just avoiding bulls altogether; they stink).

Thankfully, humans like to try new things and then apply cause-and-effect reasoning to create good, new hypothesis (based by early citizen science evidence). I suspect that trait has massive benefits in our evolution. I hope people don't get put off by calls for "rigorous science" and keep experimenting on their own... and that the scientific establishment latches on to good ideas to do more rigorous studies! [The two aren't mutually exclusive! It's not zero sum!]

I don't know if it's strictly necessary to write this after every personal experience. It might be better to save this comment for when people compare anecdotes against studies.

Note this comment is also applicable to literally the entire body of software engineering knowledge.

It may not be science but it's not worthless. Where do we get our testable hypotheses from?

He's studying medicine, not statistics :-)