News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following. Parent comment

Re:Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following by jfengel on Sunday October 24, 2021 @10:25AM (#28978196)
If the government funds it, that will make it suspicious in the eyes of many people.

There are already a number of high quality studies, and they are interpreted through people's own lens of preconception. The article points out a real problem in medical literature, but the public perception problem is much worse. Medical literature is at least trying to reach a truthful consensus.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following by abricot on Sunday October 24, 2021 @10:32AM (#28978256)
Can you explain what "truthful consensus" means in this situation?

The article does not give me any hope that medical literature is "trying" anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Ivermectin shows that not all science is worth following by jfengel on Sunday October 24, 2021 @11:21AM (#28978724)
Most researchers are interested in the truth. There are incentives for people to be lazy and fast, which leads to bad science, but most of the time they would rather be right. They'll even defend bad results, but out of self protection rather than outright intent to mislead.

So there are plenty of problems, but of an entirely different character from the outright propaganda by non-scientists practicing ideological confirmation bias.

[ Parent | on HN ]