←back to thread

Routine dental X-rays are not backed by evidence

(arstechnica.com)
352 points keithly | 1 comments | 14 Oct 24 21:37 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
kart23 ◴[14 Oct 24 22:24 UTC] No.41842758[source]▶
Isn't flossing not supported by science also, but all the news articles said you should keep flossing?
replies(11): >>41842896 #>>41842925 #>>41843072 #>>41843073 #>>41843193 #>>41843771 #>>41843835 #>>41844751 #>>41846373 #>>41848691 #>>41850301 #
lesuorac ◴[14 Oct 24 22:54 UTC] No.41843072[source]▶
Perhaps you'll find it useful that a double-blind study found no improvement in outcome from use of a parachute when jumping out of a helicopter.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/

replies(3): >>41843112 #>>41843948 #>>41844155 #
hervature ◴[14 Oct 24 23:01 UTC] No.41843112[source]▶
That's not at all what that "study" says. It is a critique (in poor taste if you ask me) that everything does not require a double-blind study.
replies(2): >>41844172 #>>41848505 #
1. mlyle ◴[15 Oct 24 01:56 UTC] No.41844172[source]▶
> It is a critique (in poor taste if you ask me) that everything does not require a double-blind study.

I think the real point is that systemic reviews often will have a pretty tilted set of included studies, because they are influenced by what things researchers choose to study.

Indeed, you probably couldn't publish a study saying that parachutes work; it's not an interesting enough finding for publication. So the only stuff you'll find, in many cases, are studies that buck the prevailing wisdom.