Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by zaarn 2930 days ago
Anecdotal data is not a good source of medical advice.
3 comments

When treating a patient, using the results of a study is a good starting point, but it may really have nothing to do with treating the specific patient. The patient may fall outside of the distribution of normal occurrences, as indicated by the study. They may be an outlier.

This is one reason why medicine is challenging - you're not treating a population, you're treating a patient.

If you are the patient, you want the doctor who is guided by science, but also not blinded by "well, the studies say to do X, but that's not working. I guess there's nothing I can do for you".

In my case, I had my tonsils removed as an adult and it is one of the best medical decisions I've ever made. Prior, I had all kinds of health problems. They are now gone, and while I used to get sick a few times a year to the extent of missing work, that no longer happens.

While I generally agree, treating a patient is also not as simple. For example, I never had my tonsils removed and in the past 5 years I have not been sick a single time. Plus, this doesn't invalidate the study itself, as the results merely lay out a chance, the probability that you will suffer long term effects.

People can smoke cigarettes their entire life and never get lung cancer or they smoke once and get a diagnosis for lung cancer next year.

It think their entire study is based on the collection of such 'anecdotes'.
With some good statistics you can make fairly certain assumptions that the anecdotal data you collect is a good sample of the broader population.

A single data point as presented by OP is less valuable than that of a study, which contains multiple data points.

It's not anecdotal because I was giving own experience.

Also I wasn't offering any advice.

Your own experience is anecdotal.
Your own experience cannot be anecdotal
Anecdotal evidence is evidence from anecdotes, i.e., evidence collected in a casual or informal manner and relying heavily or entirely on personal testimony. When compared to other types of evidence, anecdotal evidence is generally regarded as limited in value due to a number of potential weaknesses, but may be considered within the scope of scientific method as some anecdotal evidence can be both empirical and verifiable, e.g. in the use of case studies in medicine. Other anecdotal evidence, however, does not qualify as scientific evidence, because its nature prevents it from being investigated by the scientific method.

[Wikipedia/Anecdotal Evidence]

This does not contradict the point I made in my post previous to this one.