You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Lumifer comments on The Thyroid Madness: Two Apparently Contradictory Studies. Proof? - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: johnlawrenceaspden 10 April 2016 08:21PM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (76)

Comments (76)

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

Comment author: Lumifer 15 April 2016 08:40:27PM *  1 point [-]

You are falling prey to the typical mind fallacy. The meaning you ascribe to your words in not how a stranger would read them.

You asked about thyroid hormone resistance. The "actual endocrinologist" knows what that is -- it is a genetic condition. So he assumes you are talking about the genetic problem (RTH) but you are terribly confused because you somehow think that genetic conditions can be acquired after birth. At this point he probably stopped reading because why bother.

Comment author: johnlawrenceaspden 16 April 2016 10:45:39AM *  0 points [-]

Oh, well spotted! Can anyone suggest a better crank e-mail? This is actually the only one I've sent since I found Skinner's paper, which is the thing that made me go from 'dark suspicion' to 'bloody hell, this is probably true'.

Comment author: Lumifer 16 April 2016 05:01:23PM *  1 point [-]

I would suggest that your first two paragraphs should be (1) a hook, to make the reader interested; and (2) establishing your bona fides in the sense that you've read the literature and not just a random bloke who saw a programme on the BBC and now knows everything about thyroids.

Also don't be so bloody apologetic about intruding on their time and write more than a few lines. They always have the option to stop reading.

Comment author: johnlawrenceaspden 18 April 2016 05:52:16PM *  1 point [-]

Actually I wrote back once you pointed that out, and we've swapped a few e-mails since, but now he's gone silent too. It is hard, this crankery.

I explained the whole bloody thing to him, with papers attached, and said:

What I would expect you to say is:

(a) We hear that all the time, and it's rubbish because [link]

(b) That's not a bad idea, but it can't be true because [implication that I have missed that isn't true]

(c) [redacted for fear of identifying correspondent]

and he said:

I [have specialised in a thyroid-related field but I don't see CFS patients] Therefore I have no experience nor opinion about the topic you want me to address.

Am I reading too much into this, or are those the words of a man trying not to get his name mixed up in a massive scandal? Are there in fact lots of people perfectly well aware that there is something dreadful going on but no-one wants to be the first to say it out loud in public?

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit