in particular there’s no mention of the evidence against there being any effect at all.
To be clear, it’s inaccurate to describe the studies as showing evidence of no effect. All of the studies are consistent with a range of possible outcomes that include no effect (and even negative effect!) but they’re also consistent with positive effect.
That isn’t to say that there is a positive effect.
But it isn’t to say there’s a negative effect either.
I think it is best to describe this as a “lack of evidence” one way or another.
-
I don’t think it is good to laud positive evidence but refer to negative evidence only via saying “there is a lack of evidence”, which is what the disclaimers do
I don’t think there’s good evidence that anything works in animal rights and if ACE suggests anything anywhere to the contrary I’d like to push against it.
To be clear, it’s inaccurate to describe the studies as showing evidence of no effect. All of the studies are consistent with a range of possible outcomes that include no effect (and even negative effect!) but they’re also consistent with positive effect.
That isn’t to say that there is a positive effect.
But it isn’t to say there’s a negative effect either.
I think it is best to describe this as a “lack of evidence” one way or another.
-
I don’t think there’s good evidence that anything works in animal rights and if ACE suggests anything anywhere to the contrary I’d like to push against it.