[carbocation]

> As Bayesians, shouldn't this effect size cause us to update in the direction that coffee is good for health, even if we think confounding contributed to the large effect size?

If you apply this thought process to alcohol (given what we know now), what would you conclude about this approach to updating your priors based on implausible observational data?

[eszaq]

Sorry I think I'm missing some context here, was there recent definitive research on alcohol and mortality?

[carbocation]

Definitive? No.

With causal interpretability? Yes (Mendelian randomization).

[eszaq]

Do you have a link?