If asking for evidence for claims drives people away then I don't see the problem.
If they have evidence then they will post it. They will WANT to post it. It won't be like pulling teeth. People being driven away is an imaginary problem in terms of mattering to patients and parents. No evidence of treatment efficacy is lost because the people going away seem to be doing so to avoid being asked for evidence. They may feel driven away if they don't want to be asked for evidence.
Again, I don't see the problem. People are free to discuss what they are doing. If they are trying something that has no known evidence of efficacy then they should be told that. As soon as they make claims of efficacy, the requests for evidence should start rolling in. Conservative and alternative methods aspire to be a science. They should want to prove their efficacy instead of it being pulling teeth. People objecting to this are not doing science. Martha Hawes obviously would never object to people asking to see her radiographs to back up her claims. And she certainly would never think to publish without radiographs. You could have invented the most effective PT treatment in the world but if you don't have radiographs proving it, people have to take the claim on faith. Maybe the inventors are satisfied with just helping people who happen to hear about the method and take a leap of faith when they could be helping many, many more people if they publish. Maybe just picking off select people to help is okay rather than trying to help more people.
They can come here to let people know and to recruit but once the claims of efficacy are made, then evidence is required.
Nobody should be driven away for stating a new treatment, admitting there is no evidence of efficacy yet, and offering to help people learn the method to see if it is effective. Nobody should be driven away for repeating what an alternative treatment purveyor told them about curve regression. That is not happening here. What is happening here is pressure to pony up evidence of efficacy claims that drive people away.
Losing people who don't agree evidence is required for claims is an imaginary problem. People may be leaving but that is no loss to the community. Science is the only game in town and will win because it works.
If they have evidence then they will post it. They will WANT to post it. It won't be like pulling teeth. People being driven away is an imaginary problem in terms of mattering to patients and parents. No evidence of treatment efficacy is lost because the people going away seem to be doing so to avoid being asked for evidence. They may feel driven away if they don't want to be asked for evidence.
Again, I don't see the problem. People are free to discuss what they are doing. If they are trying something that has no known evidence of efficacy then they should be told that. As soon as they make claims of efficacy, the requests for evidence should start rolling in. Conservative and alternative methods aspire to be a science. They should want to prove their efficacy instead of it being pulling teeth. People objecting to this are not doing science. Martha Hawes obviously would never object to people asking to see her radiographs to back up her claims. And she certainly would never think to publish without radiographs. You could have invented the most effective PT treatment in the world but if you don't have radiographs proving it, people have to take the claim on faith. Maybe the inventors are satisfied with just helping people who happen to hear about the method and take a leap of faith when they could be helping many, many more people if they publish. Maybe just picking off select people to help is okay rather than trying to help more people.
They can come here to let people know and to recruit but once the claims of efficacy are made, then evidence is required.
Nobody should be driven away for stating a new treatment, admitting there is no evidence of efficacy yet, and offering to help people learn the method to see if it is effective. Nobody should be driven away for repeating what an alternative treatment purveyor told them about curve regression. That is not happening here. What is happening here is pressure to pony up evidence of efficacy claims that drive people away.
Losing people who don't agree evidence is required for claims is an imaginary problem. People may be leaving but that is no loss to the community. Science is the only game in town and will win because it works.
Comment