Is anecdotal evidence dangerous?

[Teamcasa]

... The real question is when does anecdotal data cross over into expert opinion?

When anecdotal data can be tested, verified and a definite and predictable result.

 

[fisheyeview]

Remember, experts built the Titanic.

 

[fweber]

a definite and predictable result.

Human physiology varies excessively for you. For you to be satisfied we need to better limit those who participate in diving so that a predictable result will follow. The U.S. Navy have many tests that can help us eliminate those who are not fit to dive, so that a predictable result will follow.

 

[Thalassamania]

Remember, experts built the Titanic.

and went to the moon.

 

[fairybasslet]

fftopic:

 

[RonFrank]

Mod Post​

I've split out the off topic Global Warming discussions, and moved them in the the Marine Science and Ecosystems area for you continued enjoyment!

Let's keep this on topic. Thanks!

Mod Post​

 

[gcbryan]

As it applies to scuba, I think everyone would be wise to question anecedotal and scientific evidence. You might think that something is correct but it's still wise to test it for yourself.

I doubt if anyone goes to 160 fsw on air just because of anecedotal evidence or feels totally safe at 100 fsw just because of scientific evidence.

 

[Teamcasa]

Human physiology varies excessively for you. For you to be satisfied we need to better limit those who participate in diving so that a predictable result will follow. The U.S. Navy have many tests that can help us eliminate those who are not fit to dive, so that a predictable result will follow.

That's true enough. However, my point is that when I read a post that supports an odd premise, like this, “I went to 160’ on air and surfaced without a safety stop and I’m fine.” The reader should do his/her own research BEFORE giving that try. We have all seen this in many posts to differing degrees.

 

[Thalassamania]

That's true enough. However, my point is that when I read a post that supports an odd premise, like this, “I went to 160’ on air and surfaced without a safety stop and I’m fine.” The reader should do his/her own research BEFORE giving that try. We have all seen this in many posts to differing degrees.

I have bounced to 160 and come back to the surface without a safety stop ... and I was fine. U.S. Navy Standard Air Tables give you 5 at 160 before you were in decompression, that's science ... not anecdote.

 

[AbyssalPlains]

I absolutely second the OP. Anecdotal evidence is never safe to rely on. It is important to keep in mind however, that all science is never absolute either. Everything we learn through rigorous scientific method can only be an approximation. This is the very nature of science. More often than not, the results are a pretty darn close approximation, often close enough that for a lot everyday uses we may look at them as "certain." But keep in mind that diving recommendations are based on statistical and empirical observations and do not grant certainty and predictive power for every single individual. An experienced doctor and researcher once used the following example to illustrate this point quite well, I think: If you were to conduct a clinical trial to investigate whether eyeglasses are beneficial and you would randomly assign 2000 people to two groups - one fitted with eyeglasses and another group without eyeglasses, would you find, that, overall, wearing eyeglasses is beneficial? Of course you would. Does that mean eyeglasses are beneficial for everybody? Of course not.