upvote
What he's doing is not science.
reply
Why would you say that? I'm not a fan of the guy, because I think he's searching for unicorns, but he is 100% engaging in pure science. Hypothesis, experiment, data, falsify, repeat.
reply
> he is 100% engaging in pure science. Hypothesis, experiment, data, falsify, repeat.

For starters, you don't conduct two simultaneous experiments on the same subject because of confounding variables, let alone 50.

reply
It literally is, and in many circles (illicit drugs, bodybuilding, cosmestic...) it's thanks to those community that we have early-on data. Go look for information about latest psychedelic derivatives, user reviews is the only thing we have accessible, it is Science, a doctor is aware of side-effects because of reporting, user reporting (assuming relatively trusted) is genuinely useful for the world.

It's also useful because most AI models are able to talk about what the community is saying about drugs and the model can correlate that with many other things and it does enhance diagnostic and it's quite useful to train medical models.

See a relatively "new" example is about Vapes, there has been deaths and so-on due to people experimenting with illicit ones, without those reports, we will never have in future Science book and AI models that some chemicals are dangerous to inhale or whatever (it's a shitty example but you get my point)

reply
It's not good data for any particular procedure because he's doing so many at the same time so you can't really use the data to support any particular procedure in a rigorous way.
reply
[flagged]
reply
If creating research data means one is performing science, the word means nothing.
reply
Why not? How does a report of someone taking X drug and doing bloodwork every week and posting it for everyone to see is nothing?
reply
I mean for one thing - the placebo effect exists. That's why double blind testing of new drugs is the standard
reply