Sunday, August 07, 2016
Why the crusade?
What is AP trying to prove with its little anti-flossing crusade?
"Evidence is weak" is a valid complaint in health or diet questions without immediate OBSERVED results. For variables like sugar, salt, red meat, butter or kale, the effects tend to be long-term and hidden in a lot of noise. "Studies" could possibly tease the result out of the noise, but in fact they don't. "Studies" continue to disagree, which means you can simply trust your own taste and judgment.
Flossing doesn't belong in that category. You can OBSERVE the result immediately and clearly every time you floss. There's STUFF on the thread that the brush didn't remove. Therefore, cleaning teeth requires two different tools.
"Studies" aren't needed.
This should be the BASIC rule of science.
If you can DIRECTLY MEASURE an OBSERVED result, you have a point.
If you need statistics to make a point, you don't have a point.
I suspect AP wanted to appear unbiased and wikileakish without committing even the tiniest 1% heresy against their bosses in the Deep State. They figured dentists are not included in any government program or Romneycare, so it's safe to offend dentists without offending the Deep State.
Labels: Blinded by Stats
¶ 1:13 AM
