Regarding incontrovertibility, studies gathered in PubMed might have their flaws, but the opinions of other's are even more flawed. Personally, I accumulate knowledge, so a new study only adds to my existing understanding; I'm not one to simply take a single study as proof, but it seems that many people are willing to trust their experience, even when the bulk of the evidence is against it. My undergraduate focused on lab study design, and I am very aware of the pitfalls of single studies, or even collections of studies. I am not confused by conflicting facts, since there is little in the world that is simply black and white. One needs to distill generalizable information from the seemingly conflicting information, and when it comes to medicine, one needs to be even more careful about the self-interest of the authors and publishers.
musings on life and liberty