[quote=“David_dns, post:64, topic:57691, full:true”]
I’ll say it another way. There isn’t any freakin’ data because the controlled studies have not been done or reputably reported.
[/quote]Untrue. There’s plenty of data. You just reject it because it doesn’t meet a standard you apply for validity.
I say that your standard sets an unreasonably high, and unrealistic bar. We rely on anecdotal and broadly experiential data across large populations to make judgments and draw conclusions all the time about the safety, efficacy, and utility of many things. You do this too.
In fact, this is the data from which we function for the vast majority of our judgements and decisions. Formal, scientifically acquired data through rigorous protocols is the tiniest fraction of the body of data that governs our choices and behavior.
Did you know there has never been a large-scale, formalized study done with randomized trials, placebo, etc. to determine the basic safety of aspirin (acetyl salicylic acid)? Sure, there have been plenty of studies of aspirin for more targeted modalities, but simple safety is not one of them. It would be a monumental waste of money and resources, because we already KNOW its safe.
How do we know that?
The scientific method, drug testing protocols, etc. are a very new phonomena in human behavior. There’s no arguing these methods haven’t added a great deal of certainty, and determinism to the accuracy of our understanding of anything being studied, but these methods are an addition to how we acquire useful data, not a complete replacement for existing means of data gathering. Indeed, the scientific method is in some cases the worst way to seek valid, accurate data.
Yet, human beings were not completely without “data” (in the form of experiential knowledge) before these methods were developed, nor was that data completely worthless and useless.
David, like you I prefer (strongly) data derived from rigorous scientific methods. Unlike you, however, I don’t reject completely information gathered through other means as having any validity. Rather, I examine the quality of the data, how it was gathered, etc. and include that in my evaluation.
As such, I have no concerns regarding the safety of aspirin. I have no concern NOT because there is some formal safety study I can point to that convinces me, but rather because Willow Bark has been used for thousands of years, safely, by billions of people. If it was unsafe, I’m confident I’d know about it – as would you, and everyone else.
I expect you too trust in the safety of aspirin, and I’d point out gazillions of other things you use every day without a second thought, for which we all accept the safety and efficacy simply because the use is so common and widespread that it would be silly to try and “establish” the safety by having a formal study.