Remix.run Logo
pixel_popping 4 hours ago

It literally is, and in many circles (illicit drugs, bodybuilding, cosmestic...) it's thanks to those community that we have early-on data. Go look for information about latest psychedelic derivatives, user reviews is the only thing we have accessible, it is Science, a doctor is aware of side-effects because of reporting, user reporting (assuming relatively trusted) is genuinely useful for the world.

It's also useful because most AI models are able to talk about what the community is saying about drugs and the model can correlate that with many other things and it does enhance diagnostic and it's quite useful to train medical models.

See a relatively "new" example is about Vapes, there has been deaths and so-on due to people experimenting with illicit ones, without those reports, we will never have in future Science book and AI models that some chemicals are dangerous to inhale or whatever (it's a shitty example but you get my point)

rtkwe 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's not good data for any particular procedure because he's doing so many at the same time so you can't really use the data to support any particular procedure in a rigorous way.

pixel_popping 4 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

Clent 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If creating research data means one is performing science, the word means nothing.

pixel_popping 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Why not? How does a report of someone taking X drug and doing bloodwork every week and posting it for everyone to see is nothing?

Wurdan 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I mean for one thing - the placebo effect exists. That's why double blind testing of new drugs is the standard

pixel_popping 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Agreed, but many drugs have a direct effect, not subtle and it's pretty much immediate to know, let say a user try that new sub-q injectable from a shady forum that discuss X compound that is supposed to cure acne, then follow protocols from other users, then do their report, often with photos, it's useful even if it's not standard, as you have a clear picture of before/after usage of that drug (it's probably fair to say that the acne clearing is that isn't placebo effect), it's useful even after a drug is authorized on the market as well as it gives additional user reports of efficiency. Realistically, some data is better than none.

Saying that wouldn't be useful is kinda like saying HN/Reddit isn't useful because it's all anecdotal, that applies to almost all topics in life.

Lastly, let's not pretend that most doctors do actually follow properly a patient blood before/during/after a course of a drug, in most cases, doctor will just ask How did it go, any side effects?... That's a new "data" for the doc, all anecdotal, almost the same value as a "trusted" rando on Reddit.