Move generally, whenever you read the percentage of patients that are noted as having a particular side effect from a medicine, the real percentage is much higher.
> Are you suggesting the study operators are tampering with numbers before publishing?
No, but did you not read the posted article? Firstly, trials don't select participants unbiasedly. Secondly, many trials are not long enough for the side effects to manifest. Thirdly, I have enough real world experience.
Real world experience doesn't count on HN health articles. If it wasn't documented by a researcher paid via funding from his industry leaders, or a government official trying to fast track his hiring in the public sector for $800k a year, it basically didn't happen.
And this just goes to reinforcing the beliefs of those who are skeptical of medical research. "Trust the science" is all well and good in theory except when the scientists are telling you a selective, cherry-picked story.
