When debating, I find that people often don’t have a good understanding of how science works or why it is important. There tends to be a ‘black and white’ picture in people’s minds where on one side they have ‘big pharma’ (and the problems that go with it) and more ‘natural’ alternative options on the other.

So, instead of using the term ‘mainstream medicine’, I found myself using ‘science-based medicine’ to emphasise that my reasoning for arguing in its favour is to do with my understanding of the scientific evidence rather than any misguided faith in ‘big pharma’ just to be mainstream. It helps emphasise that my opinions are formed based on that scientific grounding.

So it was great for me to see the term used more ‘officially’, when I discovered the blog. Needless to say it was immediately bookmarked, and I’ve visited daily ever since!

Which I thought is a bit paternalistic. Though perhaps it is also a “shruggie” attitude.

I immediately thought of the recent Atlantic article as well. I find John Ioannidis’ work very interesting but something seemed off about the tone from the author. I was hoping Steve would cover it here, but it was covered at Science Based Medicine very well here .

This discussion with Marya could be interesting if she decides to engage Steve’s actual points.

critiques the some of the challenges inherent in implementing actual SBM or even EBM but with the goal of remedying and reforming by honest appraisal –scientists and doctors are not ‘miracle workers’. And real breakthroughs are more like the rare beneficial mutation in a gene whereas most possible interventions are either neutral or harmful (to continue my evolutionary metaphor).

This attitude is far from paternalistic and all-knowing or arrogant.

I enjoyed reading Paul Feyerbend (“Against Method: Towards An Anarchy of Knowledge”) back in the eighties in juxtapose to Karl Popper but I don’t embrace the ‘nothing is really true so anything is possible’ stance.

Of course I cannot know if it was used by individuals prior to that. It is still proper to use the phrase “coin the term” if you are the first to use it with a specific meaning. In this case, we do have a very specific meaning to SBM – essentially, EBM + prior plausibility, and more broadly applying scientific principles to standards within medicine.

I have one (perhaps minor) irritation.
My father used the term ‘science-based medicine’ many years ago (and I know he was not alone in doing so).
Perhaps the claim should be that you have popularized the phrase (which you are in fact doing either way) as opposed to coin.