Originally Posted by sprinkle pocket
i'm sorry, but by this logic, shouldn't we just be able to eat chemically synthesized vitamins and avoid the need of good food? human-made goods can *never* harness the wisdom and scope of nature. good luck finding "data", as data tends to be funded by corporations that can benefit from their findings. for the same reason you won't find science backing up locally-grown organic food, or propolis or herbs (can't be patented and profited from), you'll probably not find the kind of data that you'd believe.
I'm not sure what you mean by your first comment. When asking about an estrogen pill, I was trying to determine if estrogen can effectively be absorbed orally, not offering an alternative.
As far as "data" goes, of course studies are going to be funded mainly by those who serve to benefit from them. But, if I don't base my opinion on subjective data, then what's left? Just subjective anecdotes, which don't give us any real information. Someone can tell me that they didn't suffer from PPD when they ate their placenta, but obviously that provies nothing.
I'm not just going to go around taking someone's word for it because that is fallible. A well-constructed study is what separates anecdotes from subjective data - and subjective data is so subject to cultural bias and personal opinions, a lot of it doesn't do me any good.
Let me give you an example. Insurance companies typically charge women drivers less because they get in less accidents. They do this because they've reviewed statistics in this area and drawn a conclusion based on the facts. Whereas I have a coworker (male of course) who believes women are terrible drivers. He's drawn this conclusion because of his personal issues, and the situations he looks at are so subject to this filter that he believes that his observations support that data.
One is an example of reviewing actual data, the other is an example of simply basing conclusions on personal preferences.
I don't know what basis most other people use for making their decisions, and quite frankly, I don't care. I have a strong personal preference for cold hard data (and it can be quite hard to find that, even in scientific studies, I admit) versus personal experiences.
That's why I was asking, and I don't think there's anything wrong with my asking it.
If I posted that dipping your feet in urine was great for them, would you take my word for it because my feet were in great shape, or would you want to know more?