> Half the posts in this thread bring back the old SlashDot adage: The plural of anecdote is not data.
I find the application of this logic to be entirely one-sided. Positive anecdotes are data, negative anecdotes are wives tales.
Simplifying medical information into data points is a dangerous practice which by now should be revealing itself as entirely fraudulent. Anecdotes provide context which doctors and science love to dismiss. I'll take a handful of anecdotes and appreciate all the context they provide, meanwhile the context-free "science" will go back and forth never getting anywhere nearer to better health outcomes.
I find the application of this logic to be entirely one-sided. Positive anecdotes are data, negative anecdotes are wives tales.
Simplifying medical information into data points is a dangerous practice which by now should be revealing itself as entirely fraudulent. Anecdotes provide context which doctors and science love to dismiss. I'll take a handful of anecdotes and appreciate all the context they provide, meanwhile the context-free "science" will go back and forth never getting anywhere nearer to better health outcomes.