Is the absence of evidence also evidence of absence? Proponents of a biopsychosocial view of #MECFS often appeal to such a principle rather than present evidence for a psychopathology. ->
Absence of evidence is not sufficient to prove a negative proposition. It depends on whether proper research has been carried out and whether the effect could be established with available tools. If not, to argue using absence of evidence is an argument of ignorance—a fallacy. ->
The burden of proof is always on the one who makes a claim. That means that if someone appeals to the absence of evidence, he/she must also show that proper research has been carried out AND that it is expected that the effect could be demonstrated with available tools. ->
As for #MECFS, the latter proposition is demonstrably false. When new technology has been applied—for example by Professor Ron Davis—new physiological abnormalities that were unknown and are not well understood have been observed. ->
Apart from that, many physiological abnormalities on a group level have been observed in patients with #MECFS. So, the claim that nothing of interest has been found is also dubious.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
