Science!! Fucking magnets, how do they work?

ZyyzYzzy_sl said:

How does that demonstrate that the study and practice of medicine is less scientific than sociology?

Click to expand...

Someone wants sociology to seem important.

Tautological truths are the best truths.

Burnesto_sl said:

Thought you said in another thread that you were into dudes now?

Click to expand...

What, dudes cant have big butts too?

valishar_sl said:

Einstein's Zurich Notebook

It's pretty neat, but you need a pretty deep knowledge of math to really understand it.

Click to expand...

That is awesome. I'm at the point where I can kinda understand what's going on, but don't understand a lot of the details. Yay school!

And it's really cool to see exactly where he made his "biggest mistake," in introducing the static constant.

ZyyzYzzy_sl said:

How is it more scientific than biological sciences which translate into medicine Mist? How is your precious sociology not fucking worthless?

Click to expand...

are you guys still arguing that practitioners and researchers are the same thing?

The term "scientist" is not exactly an absolute term. "anyone that uses the scientific method" Well great, that's not that useful is it? In a more practical sense, it would be someone that uses the scientific method, to do research as their job, or perhaps a primary hobby.
A practitioner doesn't really do that. (you might argue they do, during diagnosis..)

Mist_sl said:

Those are authors. While they have contributed to science, their main contributions are being good at authoring things.

*Real* science is mostly a bunch of legwork and writing done by grad students while other people take the credit.

Also, medicine is even less scientific than social sciences are. Medicine is mostly a collection of best practices handed down from one doctor to the next. Only very recently has medicine started to be informed by science and even then they get it wrong a lot.

Click to expand...

Do you actually believe this nonsense or are you just trolling?

ZyyzYzzy_sl said:

No one was ever arguing that. Mist seems to not know that doctors do conduct research, professors of subjects pertaining to the medical field (genetics, immunology, neurobiology, cell biology, etc) conduct research, and medicine isn't less "scientific" than social sciences.

She is too fucking stupid to realize that doctors do need to know about physiology, molecular biology, chemistry and other fields to properly perform their job. She thinks they base every decision based solely on what they did with their last patient, instead of formulate a plan based on their knowledge and diagnostic data of a patient.

Fuck, she even said pharmacological research was less "scientific" and played it down to guess work.

Click to expand...

I think you guys are missing her point. Really, how many doctors do legitimate research science? Hell, how many even use the research day to day out of the thousands and thousands of them? There are plenty of scientist MD but not having any data handy, I'd have to struggle to think of a single one I've ever known that legitimately was involved in experimental studies. In fact I knew one that published fairly frequently about pediatrics as I recall, but I read those articles in the waiting room out of morbid curiosity and they weren't scientific at all, just "in my experience" type things with consensus gained from just treating a ton of kids with the same diseases/disorders over the years.

I mean, there are plenty of scientists in the medical field but outside of carefully controlled drug tests we generally frown upon medial experimentation of living humans so I'm not sure there's a ton of practicing doctors in that mix... and I do draw a distinction between using new scientific consensus and actually participating in its creation. It's not a slight, but at some point isn't everyone who's not a religious nut a "scientist" as long as they read stuff occasionally that cites scientists? I guess I'd say practitioner vs research doctor is like engineer vs scientist. User vs creator. They're not inseparable but certainly have a different focus. There's the whole legal angle of practicing science in humans with treatment. Doctor House isn't exactly the norm.

Mist_sl said:

It comes from research a potential business partner (a biomedical engineer, a jewish phd with a penis if you guys need credentials) and I did.

Out of the practicing doctors we surveyed, almost none reported using scientific methods or current research in their practice. Those few that did expressed frustration that their peers did not.

I did not say that "no doctors do research." But the field of medical researchers and the field of doctors who actually practice medicine every day has a wide gulf.

Click to expand...

And? How does that change the fact that medical researchers and public health officials do some of the best sociological research there is? That was the entire point of my post, that you have to go outside of sociology into other fields to find decent sociological research. You are just spouting tangential nonsense that isn't applicable to what I said.