pellicle
Professional Dingbat, Guru and Merkintologist
Hi
firstly that's a great post.
and this is exactly what shlts me the most about presumptuous arrogant posts like the one which (yet again) triggered this sort of lengthy response: none of us are doctors apparently. These dismissive people are seldom well meaning and indeed have no idea as to what reliance doctors have on being informed by people who aren't doctors.
Take for instance this excellent paper on managing warfarin. It is NOT a journal article, it is itself NOT research, Jeff is not a doctor or a surgeon, but Jeff is a Senior Lecturer in Clinical Pharmacy at The University of Auckland and a clinical pharmacist at Waitemata DHB. Before moving to NZ he managed a pharmacist-led, open access outpatient anticoagulation service in the UK serving a catchment of half a million people. The service ran eight clinics a week looking after only newly initiated and the most problematic patients.
If Jeff was posting here twats like the house flipper (sorry Dick I accept your very understanding evaluation and I have my own) would dismiss Jeff if he was a poster here. Much as they would dismiss Al Lodwick were he posting.
Why is this line of argument even given (the line that "we are all just bloggers"), my view is (formed on many years here) that it is because "they were told" things by their doctor and they feel very uncomfortable in the emerging evidence that maybe what they were told was wrong. So they double down on it.
Let me furnish an example from my blog:
https://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-discussion-gets-nowhere.html
People like our house flipper will not be convinced and will indeed just double down on their beliefs like a martyr.
Further I think they also enjoy stirring up trouble.
Much of society has this idea that "belief" is what matters, indeed it is the core of what happens in religion. Faith in the "word". This is of course NOT what science is built upon, but we know from history that even physicists have trouble letting go of cherished ideas, thus Max Plank (Nobel prize winner) famously wrote:
Best Wishes
firstly that's a great post.
As a medical professional having done surgery for many years I sort of find it interesting that lay people think that what surgeons suggest is always optimal.
and this is exactly what shlts me the most about presumptuous arrogant posts like the one which (yet again) triggered this sort of lengthy response: none of us are doctors apparently. These dismissive people are seldom well meaning and indeed have no idea as to what reliance doctors have on being informed by people who aren't doctors.
Take for instance this excellent paper on managing warfarin. It is NOT a journal article, it is itself NOT research, Jeff is not a doctor or a surgeon, but Jeff is a Senior Lecturer in Clinical Pharmacy at The University of Auckland and a clinical pharmacist at Waitemata DHB. Before moving to NZ he managed a pharmacist-led, open access outpatient anticoagulation service in the UK serving a catchment of half a million people. The service ran eight clinics a week looking after only newly initiated and the most problematic patients.
If Jeff was posting here twats like the house flipper (sorry Dick I accept your very understanding evaluation and I have my own) would dismiss Jeff if he was a poster here. Much as they would dismiss Al Lodwick were he posting.
Why is this line of argument even given (the line that "we are all just bloggers"), my view is (formed on many years here) that it is because "they were told" things by their doctor and they feel very uncomfortable in the emerging evidence that maybe what they were told was wrong. So they double down on it.
Let me furnish an example from my blog:
https://cjeastwd.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-discussion-gets-nowhere.html
A Professor from Georgia State University, Jason Reifler conducted a series of experiments that looked at whether people changed their views when they were presented with the correct facts. He found that not only did they not, but it reinforced their will to keep a grip on their existing views.
...
ELEANOR HALL: So not only did they not believe the facts that you were putting before them; they actually reinforced the incorrect views they originally had.
JASON REIFLER: Exactly.
ELEANOR HALL: What hope is there then for truth in politics?
JASON REIFLER: The downside of the research that my co-author and I have done to date is that it's very depressing. We don't have a terribly good understanding yet of ways to try and improve public debate, to try and improve political dialogue.
People like our house flipper will not be convinced and will indeed just double down on their beliefs like a martyr.
Further I think they also enjoy stirring up trouble.
Much of society has this idea that "belief" is what matters, indeed it is the core of what happens in religion. Faith in the "word". This is of course NOT what science is built upon, but we know from history that even physicists have trouble letting go of cherished ideas, thus Max Plank (Nobel prize winner) famously wrote:
“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
Best Wishes