We strive to be a rational society that leverages scientific knowledge to make good choices. That's a good thing. However, expertise isn't clear-cut. It's becoming evident that many 'scientifically proven' facts about health and diet, for example. are unfounded because the trials were too limited or the results misinterpreted.
I was listening to a CBC feature the other day where one of Canada's main scientific bodies was calling for a re-evaluation of the way we do trials and public their results. There's strong economic and professional incentive for a study or trial to yield actionable results. However, there is no money or prestige to be gained in carrying out wider trials to challenge the validity of those results. In short, much of what we hold as scientific truth is based on questionable data and studies.
That doesn't mean we should ignore science, of course. But it does mean that we should be careful of accepting anything a given expert or a study concludes until we have more time and more data to validate it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
|
|