[pclowes]

You can just do things. Not everything needs a study, you don’t have to justify yourself to anyone!

Try things, if you like them, do them!

Try not living a neurotic “study” based life, I am trying it and its pretty great!

[stuckonempty]

You can and should! Just don’t go justifying that your choices are rooted in science when they aren’t.

[thrawa8387336]

What, you think Newton relied on a study to believe his own conclusions?

[IAmBroom]

I am aware that meta-studies of glucosamine chondroitin show No Significant Gains in joint pain. I would never waste my money on it.

But my newly adopted dog had hip issues, and I bought a few months worth of a diet supplement in the hopes of doing something meaningf... dammit, it's glucosamine.

They claimed double-blind studies showed decreases in limping in just two months.

Two months, more or less, I stopped seeing him limp by the time we left the dog park. He still does sometimes, but it's rare - not every damn day, by any means.

We aren't that fricking different biologically from dogs in our skeletal attachment system. Maybe it's still a placebo, but it seems to defeat that idea. Maybe enough human issues are based on things that don't translate to dogs - sitting at a desk all day, eating junk food, walking upright... - that it helps them, but not enough of us.

Don't know. These GC supplements have convinced me it's worth my money, and he loves eating them, so he votes 'yes', too.

[rkomorn]

I found it interesting that placebo effect is also sort of relevant in pet care: it makes owners believe the pet is doing better.

Unfortunately, the study that showed this used the same medicine my dog had been on, and since it was for epilepsy, I can totally believe that whether I thought it worked had no connection to its effectiveness.

[tartoran]

Absolutely and this is something that can be tested rather easily. If blue filters aren't immediately helpful to eye strain then they probably don't work for you but if they are they probably do work for you.

[Perizors]

Every dismissive reply talks about eye strain nada that is by far not what the author is taking about.

[IAmBroom]

You can test the negative easily, but the positive is harder. Thus: placebos.

[root_axis]

Neurotic is bad by definition, but using studies to inform your habits seems like a wise thing to do.

Obviously you shouldn't follow studies blindly, especially because many studies are poorly conducted and do not replicate, but in general, we know that just following your gut is suboptimal and sometimes dangerous in cases when studies give us clear information.

[wtetzner]

Unfortunately it doesn't seem to be easy to understand what studies are actually demonstrating, based on how often you see people making giant leaps to conclusions that don't really follow from study results.

[erelong]

"This is the way"

I think the other problems are that some things aren't proven or some studies are wrong, so it doesn't eliminate making choices on certain topics without a study backing what you are to do (and then you can even defy the studies if necessary...)

[UqWBcuFx6NV4r]

Yep. This attitude is utterly pervasive. We may as well just give up and start saying “science says…”, the way some people, especially some people here, seem to misunderstand what role studies play, what their limitations are, etc.

Imagine if you have a rare genetic mutation that causes Night Shift to be extremely, extremely effective, and you don’t even try to use it because A Study Didn’t Tell You To.

You are indeed allowed to just…try things and see for yourself, especially such ostensibly low-risk things like this. The literature is not a bible.

[Barbing]

(just nothing from Goop)