Doctors are attempting to change standard medical practice, and the decision to make this change involved absolutely no consideration for the actual accuracy of the estimation in question, either before or after the change. https://twitter.com/lizstein_/status/1265071486638800897

Does this change result in greater accuracy? Was the previous usage particularly inaccurate? Has any of this been demonstrated? Is there data? Anything?

I don't know. The change might result in greater accuracy. But that isn't why the change happened.

This is concerning.

In fact, it's quite horrifying.

Imagine that any change can be implemented regarding medical best practices, but none of the changes are based on data. And they don't need to be based on data. In fact, asking for data is now a social faux pas.

Would you trust your doctor?

For reference, you SHOULD trust your doctor. But we're living in a world where that trust is becoming less and less justified regarding the epistemic rigor of the field of medicine. Every time something like this is happens, I have a harder and harder time defending the academy.

I swear that I wrote this thread (below) before I saw the tweet that I just quoted (above). https://twitter.com/M_Methuselah/status/1265388622871740421