SoylentNews

CDC Gets List of Forbidden Words: Science-Based, Evidence-Based, Vulnerable, Fetus, ...

posted by martyb on Sunday December 17 2017, @05:16AM   
from the George-Orwell-Says-Hi! dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

Policy analysts at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta were told of the list of forbidden words at a meeting Thursday with senior CDC officials who oversee the budget, according to an analyst who took part in the 90-minute briefing. The forbidden words are "vulnerable," "entitlement," "diversity," "transgender," "fetus," "evidence-based" and "science-based."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-gets-list-of-forbidden-words-fetus-transgender-diversity/2017/12/15/f503837a-e1cf-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html

You don't say!

---

Original Submission

• Re:You're implying non-evidence-based proceduresAr Re:You're implying non-evidence-based proceduresAr (Score: 4, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday December 17 2017, @08:45AM (2 children)

  by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Sunday December 17 2017, @08:45AM (#610915) Journal

  Actually, no, they aren't necessarily implying evidence-based procedures are okay. "Evidence-based" is actually a technical term in medicine [wikipedia.org], referring to approaches that are more heavily dependent on rigorous stats in evaluating clinical efficacy ( and often specific levels of concern depending on certain study designs, etc.).

  All medicine is empirical to some extent (one would hope, anyway), but that doesn't mean it's "evidence-based" according to the technical definition, which require more rigorous evaluation of evidence and study design.

  And there are also legitimate concerns about "evidence-based" approaches in medicine that specify too much rigor early on (e.g., since they may overlook small effects in exploratory studies, may misunderstand or misinterpret outcomes due to confounding factors within a complex system like the human body, etc.). And sometimes "intuitive" clinical procedures have later been shown to be effective in a more statistically rigorous study.

  I'm not saying this term can't be abused or misused -- obviously it can be. But it also tries to make a technical distinction about statistical rigor in medical studies, and inability to use the term may hamper discussion about that.

  Parent

  Starting Score:	1		point
  Moderation		+2
  Informative=2, Total=2
  Extra 'Informative' Modifier		0
  Karma-Bonus Modifier		+1
  Total Score:		4

• Re:You're implying non-evidence-based proceduresAr Re:You're implying non-evidence-based proceduresAr (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday December 17 2017, @08:49AM (1 child)

  by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Sunday December 17 2017, @08:49AM (#610917) Journal

  My first sentence is missing a "non" (I.e. not implying non-evidenced-based procedures are okay, at least in the common sense of the term).

  Parent

  • Thanks, I misunderstood the term (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @09:40AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 17 2017, @09:40AM (#610936)

    ..

    Parent