Why does every post having to do with a scientifically testable question almost invariably have top comments which are purely anecdotal rather than even attempting to point at empirical evidence?
This is particularly noticeable in anything having to do with quality of life or lifestyle questions, including the current front page question about anti-depressants. Indeed that relatively upvoted post goes so far as to ask purely for anecdotes - neatly dismissing nearly a century of evidence on the placebo effect, the known wide variance of reactions to any intervention and a million other documented factors that render anecdotes useless. Indeed, as far as HN is concerned, we may as well be in the dark ages, taking a poll on how HNers respond to leeches.
On a site users often describe as a kind of oasis from the nonsense perpetuated on the rest of social media, this seems rather baffling and suggests a need for - at minimum - some self-reflection.
This is particularly noticeable in anything having to do with quality of life or lifestyle questions, including the current front page question about anti-depressants. Indeed that relatively upvoted post goes so far as to ask purely for anecdotes - neatly dismissing nearly a century of evidence on the placebo effect, the known wide variance of reactions to any intervention and a million other documented factors that render anecdotes useless. Indeed, as far as HN is concerned, we may as well be in the dark ages, taking a poll on how HNers respond to leeches.
On a site users often describe as a kind of oasis from the nonsense perpetuated on the rest of social media, this seems rather baffling and suggests a need for - at minimum - some self-reflection.