NancyLebovitz comments on Open Thread, November 1 - 7, 2013 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: witzvo 02 November 2013 04:37PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (299)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 07 November 2013 02:03:22PM 1 point [-]

Someone who seemed a bit better informed

Could be a few things - looks like part of one of the other ligaments, is usually damaged doing a 'standard' dissection, plain old 'you see what you think you should see' bias, some combo of all of the above...

And that comment is answered by:

Medicine needs more Masters and PhD students. I'm sure if they had as many students studying the body in extreme detail, like the eleventy billion English majors who write thesis/dissertations on say, Shakespeare, this would've been hammered out decades ago. XD

Which is interesting-- sometimes studying things in extreme detail "just because" (probably because the object of study has high status-- consider early observations of the planets) can pay off big.

Comment author: Vaniver 07 November 2013 05:39:20PM 1 point [-]

The "new ligament discovered" angle gets less impressive (to me, at least) when I read this part:

Their starting point: an 1879 article by a French surgeon that postulated the existence of an additional ligament located on the anterior of the human knee.

Comment author: gwern 07 November 2013 08:06:06PM 6 points [-]

I'm more impressed, actually, in terms of the unevenness of progress - it took ~134 years to confirm his postulate? It's not like corpses were unavailable for dissection in 1879.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 09 November 2013 03:25:47PM 1 point [-]

It inspires more awe at our collective failures, but suggests that we should not be so impressed with the new people as if they had a method that would make us sure that we hadn't missed even more ligaments.