Just wondering, who actually thinks a run off the mill physician doctor is better positioned to scrutinise research than someone with a (for example) PhD in a biological sciences field? even If Its not respiratory, having a phd in a scientitic field makes them more qualified to comment than your run of the mill GP. Its a trump style argument (science denial and general anti-intellectualism) to imply otherwise, and Is either character assassination or ignorance, either way its horribly wrong.
Many medical doctors don't have a clue about the real nitty gritty of research, and nor should they because it's not really their job and they don't have the time to be scrutinising research. Physicians are generalists in patient care for the most part, and even specialist doctors aren't scrutinising research methodology, there's so much to read they have to skim over and accept the findings.
Attack the arguement, not the person
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- RAP
- Doctor Brad is not a Medical Doctor - just ask him
Doctor Brad is not a Medical Doctor - just ask him, page-23
Currently unlisted. Proposed listing date: 4 SEPTEMBER 2024 #
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 26 more messages in this thread...
This thread is closed.
You may not reply to this discussion at this time.
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add RAP (ASX) to my watchlist
The Watchlist
UNT
UNITH LTD
Idan Schmorak, CEO
Idan Schmorak
CEO
Previous Video
Next Video
SPONSORED BY The Market Online