Anecdotal Evidence ~VS~ Double Blind Evidence

Which do you go with more?

 

If 1000 natural healers backed a claim that something worked good for their clients I would believe them over a regular MD prescribing a drug that was approved by the FDA

 

double blind study. 1000 people who say they benefited from something doesn't mean a thing. it's not science. and medicine is. so those 1000 people and medicine are incompatible with each other.

 

I vote neither

 

double blind FTW!

 

if a drug has death as a known side effect would you take it?

 

life has death as a definite side effect.

also, no known drug has death as a side effect. unless you mess up your dosages and/or mix it with other drugs you're not supposed to mix it with.

 

One of the many reasons I hate watching tv is the drug commercials and their list of side effect at the end of the ad where many clearly state death is a side effect. Listen to the ads you will hear death listed as a known side effect.\\


\Here is a video with some very interesting facts about prescription drugs and a ice song to go along with it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3SzclP8AHM"]Most Astonishing Health Disaster Revealed - Discover the Truth about big Pharma - YouTube

 

I thought this was a great topic for this forum area....even stickied it

but ill dump it if it strays

 

Thanks BBAD everyone stay on topic please.

 

1000 people, whatever...

The plural of 'anecdote' is 'anecdotes', not data.

 

Double blind. Can scientists be corrupted? Sure. But 1,000 average joes don't necessarily know what there talking about in terms of correlation vs causation. The two are NOT the same and are often confused. Scientific studies have the advantage of providing for other factors, setting up a control group, and studying actual OBJECTIVE/lab data instead of only the subjective. Not that the subjective isn't important, but subjective alone doesn't get you very far.

And yes, I would take a drug who's POSSIBLE side effect was death if I knew that the alternative was CERTAIN death. And fyi, I do take prescriptions which might one day give me cancer, but I know from experience that I would die without them. If you are healthy enough that you don't need prescriptions, good for you. Not all of us are. I don't care how many wikipedia or webmd articles you've read, or how many little youtube videos you've watched, unless you've been professionally trained in the health sciences, I will NEVER take you seriously. That's not to say that doctors are right all the time about everything, but I would still take their opinion into a higher regard than something I saw on the internet.

 

it just so happens that I have been trained.

 

As have I. I would still trust myself and the scientific information I've learned more than any anecdotal "evidence" I read online.

 

What does that have to do with your poll question?
You don't want the thread to wander off topic, but you are the one taking it in that direction.

Double blind study all the way.
double blind studies are purposely designed to eliminate any subjective or suggestive results, and therefore are a much more reliable source of data.

Anecdotal evidence is flawed due to the test subjects pre-conceptions and expectations, that is why there is such a thing as double-blind studies.
I'm sure you've heard of the placebo effect.

What anecdotal evidence does do is provide a topic to be put through such tests as double-blind research to confirm or disprove such anecdotal evidence.

 

Humm it appears that known side effects are anecdotal. So I guess it is not necessary to heed to them.

Fortunately I did almost all of my studying before I ever had access to the internet. Being that I am approaching 60 years old I guess I am just a little convinced and stubborn that I can figure out what is wrong with me if I am sick.

When I as young I used to really trust medical double blind studies. I was gung ho for modern science! I just don't trust it any more. I trust trauma medical care. If I had a disease personally, I would never go for main stream medical treatment. Every prescription drug I have ever taken has made me feel worse. I took all kinds of medications for my allergies and never got over them until I stopped using prescription drugs and started using natural means. I was allergic to almost everything soaps, foods, fabrics, I as always leaking out of my nose, eyes, and skin always covered in rashes.

People did manage to survive for centuries before modern medicine so I tend to just use centuries old remedies always promising myself that if I do not get well I will seek a MD. So, for well over 30 years I have not had to go to a regular doctor except for once when an insect few into my ear. I called around to see who could remove it for the least amount of money before going though.

Yes I have. If I get well because my mind believes I will at least it does save me money on health insurance and medical bills. Maybe when I am having symptoms I just think I am not well to begin with. Either way I am very happy with my present health. I seem to be getting better all the time. I do realize it could just be all in my mind.

 

Same here...

Many things ARE FROWNED UPON by MSM because they cant get $$$ for it so they automatically say its NO GOOD.... (Its a BIG PHARMA SCAM)

Double blind FDA approved is mostly BS. It is staggering how many people die every year from taking properly prescribed medication that is "FDA approved".

www.ourcivilisation.com/medicine/usamed/deaths.htm


BIG PHARMA DRUGS ARE NO GOOD.... YOUR BASICALLY PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE WITH THEM!

www.newswithviews.com/Ciola/greg2.htm

 

There are many centuries worth of evidence that has been discounted as unscientific. imo we are loosing our culture to what is now called science.

If not for anecdotal evidence humanity would have died off long ago because doctors and healers would have had nothing to guide them in treating the sick.

I cannot accept evidence that allows death to be an acceptable cure for illness for myself. I will not take any medication where death or other life threatening disease or disorder is a known side effect. i cannot conceive how anyone can read these side effects and take a medication in spite of it. It is a disclaimer stating if you take this and become sicker you cannot sue us.

 

Exactly!!!!!!! (I dunno what to say but thats an EXCELLENT reply)

 

you realize that the reason we live longer now as opposed to centuries ago is because of medical science, right?

'natural' remedies are all well and good for minor things, and some of them may actually have beneficial effects, but nothing really comes close to western science-based medicine when it comes to treating serious, life-threatening disease (heart disease, cancer, stroke, etc.).