At the moment I have a generally disinterested but somewhat positive attitude toward the new medicines. It looks like a way to lose 15 lbs in two months with few side effects.
Science researcher Stuart Ritchie (on my sidebar but behind a paywall for a lot of his stuff) tends to like pointing out people's very bad reasoning for or against various scientific claims. In this tweet, he lists the terrible arguments the Guardian has put forward against the stuff. Reading them, it does make me feel more positive toward it. Knuckleheads being against something is not really an argument for it, but somehow we tend to think so. I didn't see it on the list, but I have heard people getting torqued off because "Rich people are going to get this first and it's not fair." Sounds great to me. They bring the price down over time.
"Knuckleheads being against something is not really an argument for it,"
ReplyDeleteThat's true--a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes--but when the arguments against are uniformly crazy... It's generally against interest to use stupid arguments when good ones are available, leading to the suspicion that there aren't good arguments against "whatever". Or that the authors have weird ideas about what is significant, or that they want to distract you from something else.
Given the source, I suspect the authors are ignorant.