addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwchatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-crosscrosseditemptyheartfacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgoogleimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Re: [bostonatheists] Yoga Lessons in public school

From: Zachary B.
Sent on: Friday, October 26, 2012 3:01 PM
<<And to address something mentioned previously, just because some of the peers involved in the peer-review process are CAM practitioners does not mean they are not properly analyzing the evidence or negate the peer review process.  A good peer review consists of a panel of a variety of experts.  Particularly in a controversial topic like CAM it will consist of both mainstream and CAM practitioners to combat accusations of bias from both sides.>>
This is a useful point, I think. It's all too easy for the defenders of a fringe hypothesis, to dismiss a lack of evidence in favor of their hypothesis as the predictable outcome of a "mainstream" institutional science set against them from the get-go. Whereas that ad hoc defense becomes a lot thinner, if there are CAM practitioners on the byline.

More tools in the rational analysis toolkit. Thank you for the expert perspective, Amanda!

- Z

PS: Friends don't let friends self-medicate with homeopathy.

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy