[SketchySeaBeast]

> It's bad because you are isolated. You need to get grounded in order to sleep properly:

> https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15650465/

This was published by the Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, which has also published articles on how homeopathy is effective. I don't know that I would consider it a high quality source.

[xdavidliu]

I noticed the same thing, but this makes me more concerned: the link has nih.gov in it. Usually when I read articles from that URL, I tend to put a bit more trust in them than say healthline.org or some blogspam or something like that. Does this mean I have to start taking nih.gov articles with a grain of salt too?

[porkbeer]

Yes. Blindly trusting any source is just another fpavor of ignorance.

[xdavidliu]

do i start with the same level of distrust when reading something on nih.gov and healthline.com?

[mrguyorama]

The UK NIH unfortunately has a reality ignoring relationship with "homeopathy" and other "alternative" medicines, up to and including the current king being a vocal Proponent of using more alternative medicine to reduce costs and improve health.

It's not great.

[kjs3]

Probably some powerful/connected 'teach the controversy' snake-oil peddlers forced the NIH to publish this. At least they were able to segregate the woo off into it's own section.

[incomingpain]

I sourced the NIH. I'm not familiar with the infinite number of journals and their associated possible biases.

I did get downvoted badly. I was not aware the NIH was so untrustworthy. People usually accept them as a source.

I will now question the NIH. Thanks for telling me about the NIH.