this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2024
162 points (95.0% liked)

Ask Science

8598 readers
22 users here now

Ask a science question, get a science answer.


Community Rules


Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.


Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.


Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.


Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.


Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.


Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.


Rule 7: Report violations.Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.


Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.


Rule 9: Source required for answers.Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.


By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.

We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

There is a tendency for real doctors with backing from Academia or whoever's in charge of deciding how you science to just plain getting it wrong and not realizing it for a long time.

Homeopathy is a good example of this, as it appeared to get great results when it was created during the Bubonic Plague and had such staying power to the point that in the 1800's it was considered a legitimate and mainstream field of medical practice.

Now today we know Homeopathy is nonsense... Remembers New Age Healing is still a thing Okay, those of us with sense know homeopathy is garbage. With the only reason it was getting such wonderful results was because the state of medicine for a long period of time in human history was so god awful that not getting any treatment at all was actually the smarter idea. Since Homeopathy is basically just "No medicine at all", that's exactly what was happening with its success.

Incidentally this is also why the Christian Science movement (Which was neither Christian nor Science) had so many people behind it, people were genuinely living longer from it because it required people to stop smoking at a time when no one knew smoking killed you.

Anyhow. With that in mind, I want to know if there's a case where the exact opposite happened.

Where Scientists got together on a subject, said "Wow, only an idiot would believe this. This clearly does not work, can not work, and is totally impossible."

Only for someone to turn around, throw down research proving that there was no pseudo in this proposed pseudoscience with their finest "Ya know I had to do it 'em" face.

The closest I can think of is how people believed that Germ Theory, the idea that tiny invisible creatures were making us all sick, were the ramblings of a mad man. But that was more a refusal to look at evidence, not having evidence that said "No" that was replaced by better evidence that said "Disregard that, the answer is actually Yes"

Can anyone who sciences for a living instead of merely reading science articles as a hobby and understanding basically only a quarter of them at best tell me if something like that has happened?

Thank you, have a nice day.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 115 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Off the top of my head - handwashing before surgery/delivering a baby reducing patient deaths (though you mention germ theory), plate tectonics, the evolution of species, heliocentricism.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I think it's important to detail just how much the scientific community rejected the whole idea of washing your hands. Even though Semmelweis dropped his hospitals maternity mortality rate from 18% to 2%

"In 1865, the increasingly outspoken Semmelweis allegedly suffered a nervous breakdown and was committed to an asylum by his colleagues. In the asylum, he was beaten by the guards. He died 14 days later from a gangrenous wound on his right hand that may have been caused by the beating."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 months ago

Holy shit

"This guy washes his hands, clearly he's crazy, take him out back; if he dies it's a mercy killing."

Was actually said by someone at one point.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

Gah, I was going to say plate tectonics.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ChicoSuave 95 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Continental drift was a theory formed in 1912 by a German meteorologist, Alfred Wegener. Geologists balked at the idea of enormous landmasses moving and said the idea of an Urkonintent was ridiculous. And besides, he was a weatherman, German weatherman, so outside of his field and untrustworthy as a German was considered at the outbreak of WW1.

Then, 50 or so years later his theory was rediscovered when different fields were trying to understand polar magnetic drift evident in iron ore formation. The only explanation that made sense from the evidence is that mountains were not permanent and oceans didn't exist in some areas - a lot like the land masses moved.

Wegener was eventually vindicated in almost all areas except drift speed. There was an Urkonintent, which has been named Pangaea. The continents do move but because they sit upon plates. He had taught the world about the world but died before anyone thought he was right.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 2 months ago (3 children)

An interesting detail of this story that I only learned recently was that the core ideas of Wegener’s theory were in fact generally more well-received by European geologists, with prominent advocates even in the 1920s. It was primarily North American geologists who mocked him and dismissed the theory upon its 1925 American publication, and this may have been partly due to the English translation (from the 1922 German 3rd edition of his book) having a “tone” of stilted presumption and dogmatism that utilitarian translations of German sometimes have.

That tone might explain why the theory (and Wegener himself) was smacked down with such prejudice by American geologists. In particular, we have a talk given by Charles Schuchert at the 1926 Symposium on Continental Drift hosted by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists in which he mischaracterized Wegener’s theory as a facile observation of coastline similarity. In fact, Wegener based his argument on deep-sea continental slopes, where edges could be shown to fit more closely, but he didn’t defend himself at the symposium (perhaps again due to the language barrier). So unfortunately the misunderstanding of continental drift persisted in tangential American geology circles until the 1958 theory of plate tectonics took over while European geologists generally accepted the core ideas early on.

[–] applebusch 23 points 2 months ago

That's so American it's almost comical

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago
[–] spittingimage 82 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The germ theory of disease was originally very unpopular with doctors who subscribed to the miasma theory of disease. The idea that a doctor should was their hands before tending to a patient was seen as insulting. Doctors were gentlemen! Their personal hygiene was beyond reproach!

[–] Mbourgon 24 points 2 months ago

The truly horrifying part is that the guy who proposed it showed it worked, made people do it… and then when he died they stopped and the rates went back. He was committted to an asylum for his effort and died there 2 weeks later, due to…infection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

[–] Anticorp 21 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I read that they would go from performing an autopsy, to delivering a baby, without washing their hands.

[–] ivanafterall 15 points 2 months ago

It's the circle of life.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The Dead Internet conspiracy theory was written with total crackpot paranoid thinking about ruling elites, likely antisemitic undertones, and general tinfoil hat reasoning about AI. Plus generative language models were nowhere near advanced or skilled enough at the time the conspiracy was purported to be happening.

But it was accidentally prophetic in at least two ways by 2024:

  1. Corporations have completely strangled online social spaces to the point that most people only visit about 1 to 3 of them, and
  2. Online discourse in those social spaces has been absolutely captured and manipulated by multiple governments trying to manipulate other countries and stir them into pointless ragebait frenzies.

It wasn't due to the illuminati, the Jews, or anything weird and bigoted conspiracies of old have traditionally blamed. It was thanks to billionaires, corporate and government espionage, AI grifters, and unregulated scammer networks (digital currency counts too) jumping onto the same technology at the same time and ruining everything on the Internet in similar ways.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

This is the first I'm hearing of antisemitism being at all related. Where did this come from?

[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago (9 children)

Secret ruling elites is a dog whistle - it's Nazi cabalistic rhetoric. See also Protocols of the Elders of Zion: a Nazi propaganda piece.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] fishos 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

OP is inadvertantly providing another example: the phrase "conspiracy theory". It was coined by the US government as a way to discredit ideas - to make people look like crackpots. Lots of negative propaganda was created around that phrase.

Fast forward to today and "conspiracy theory", though admittedly still tainted in various ways, has made a resurgence. Things that would have gotten you laughed out of the room are now proven fact(like Iran-Contra, for a simple and fairly uncontroversial example).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I wouldn't worry too much about it, *NEARLY * every conspiracy theory ties back to Anti-Semitism and I'm not even joking.

Faked Moon Landing? Flat Earth? Holocaust Denial?

"Jews did it bro" - Asshole who insists he's "Just asking questions"

Edit: Clarified hyperbole

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TheFonz 15 points 2 months ago

Dude. Just take a stroll along X (Twitter) or YouTube comments.

Sooooooo many bots linked to profiles with Ai generated images talking to each other. It's wild.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 71 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The fact that people with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis originally and demeaningly called Chronic Fatigue Syndrome can’t exercise.

It was first believed to be a mental health disorder where people are scared of doing activity. And patients who said exercising made them worse were treated for hysteria and kinesophobia (fear of exercise).

Now after a decade of so of biomedical research, and after research showing Graded Exercise therapy worked was discredited, we have a steady stream of studies showing different abnormalities and harmful reactions to exercise. Increased autoimmune activation post exercise, microclotting, mitochondial dysfunction, T-cell exhaustion. And most importantly with a dozen or so 2-day CPET studies, we have definitive proof that while healthy controls improve exertional capacity by exercising, these patients are the exact opposite, they worsen.

There’s even been a couple cases of young people 20-30 having a degenerative disease state that killed them.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 2 months ago

There are unfortunately still a lot of medical practitioners out there who either don't believe in it or know nothing about it. I don't like disclosing my diagnosis with new doctors because you just don't know how they will respond.

Another interesting tidbit, by the way, is that studies have found that people who are more active and athletic are more likely to develop ME. That was the case for me. It's really rough going from being an active, semi-athletic person to being barely able to function.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 62 points 2 months ago
[–] outrageousmatter 55 points 2 months ago

Sugar is the reason for the rise of heart disease that was happening in US. John Yudkin was the one to purpose that sugar was dangerous for our bodies and heart plus responsible for obesity but he couldn't prove it and was criticized by his scientist who were paid by the sugar industry. I forget to state the sugar industry was funding scientist to blame it all on fat. It was a pseudoscience till the 70s and 80s when they found the correlation that Yudkin was missing.

[–] Eheran 55 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

Quantum Mechanics: The early concepts of quantum mechanics, such as quantized energy levels and wave-particle duality, were initially met with resistance, even by scientists like Albert Einstein, who helped develop them.

Reason for Rejection: The ideas were counterintuitive and challenged classical physics' deterministic view, introducing probabilistic interpretations of nature.

Adoption: The overwhelming experimental evidence, such as the photoelectric effect, blackbody radiation, and the behavior of atoms and subatomic particles, eventually led to the acceptance of quantum mechanics as a fundamental framework in physics.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Schrödinger's cat was also meant as a rejection of quantum mechanics. Something cannot be both a wave and a partical until observed the same way a cat cannot be both alive and dead until observed. However, it does seem like quantum superposition is a reality, making the thought experiment even more bizarre.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago

To make it clear how bizarre, The Elitzur–Vaidman bomb test has actually been experimented, and proven both do simultaneously exist and interact with each other. To expand the Schrödinger's cat joke, quantum physics allows that you may find a half-eaten dead cat in the box.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

For us today it may be surprising, but in 1922, Einstein was not awarded for the Relativity theories (SRT 1905, ART 1915) with the Physics Nobel prise 1921, but for his theory on the explanation of the photoelectric effect (1905), as the theory of relativity was still controversially discussed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago

Our professor in quantum chemistry always told the story, that no one believed in it in the beginning and wanted to disprove it. This lead to one of the best tested hypotheses in the field that it is today.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 47 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A lot of science around trees and forest management has gone this way. Forest used to be seen as competitive areas that needed to be thoroughly managed to be healthy. Now we know that’s not true at all, and overall would be better off if we just let them be (in most, though not all cases). Same with the idea that trees communicate with each other and share resources. This was dismissed and ridiculed for a long time, but has now been pretty resoundingly proven true. Peter Wohlleben’s The Secret Life of Trees talks a lot about this.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (8 children)

Kind of a reverse Uno on your question, but I thought it was interesting while Nazism came to prominence, some scientists were like hey I'm just as racist and anti-semitic as you, but this race stuff you're doing isn't very scientific. They were dismissed as quacks. Later after doing horrible experiments, nazi scientists were frustrated that their findings weren't adding up to their ideology.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] frigidaphelion 34 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Lmao geology oddly enough

edit: I recommend "A Short History of Nearly Everything" by Bill Bryson, super fun and goes in to a lot of things relevant to this post.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Got_Bent 33 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (10 children)

You've led me to quite a Christian Scientist rabbit hole, but I cannot for the life of me find the requirement to start smoking. Rereading, is that maybe a typo that should've said they required people to stop smoking? I can't find that either, but it seems to make more sense to me.

[–] NounsAndWords 16 points 2 months ago

You can't stop smoking until you start smoking....

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] FarraigePlaisteach 32 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS) was originally dismissed by a lot of community doctors as well as more academic medical people. There are still a few who don’t believe in it and dismiss it as a behavioural or attitude problem. Thankfully those people are in the minority now. Unfortunately that doesn’t mean they’re not in influential positions.

One surprising contributor to validating ME/CFS is long covid, which seems to be the same condition but catalysed by a different virus.

I’m not a medical expert and could have mistakes in the above post but it’s generally correct.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago

I hate to be so selfish, but as someone with ME, the research that has accompanied Long Covid has been a real blessing. Prior to Long Covid, so little was being done and few people took ME/CFS seriously.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

A lot of mathematicians made fun of imaginary numbers when they were first proposed. In fact, the name "imaginary numbers" was actually given by skeptics to make fun of it. It kinda makes sense, imaginary numbers are all based off of a couple fairly strange assumptions, but they make otherwise difficult problems solvable.

The whole thing kinda ruined math though. Nowadays, mathematicians spend their entire careers building frameworks based on silly assumptions in the hopes that one day it'll be useful.

[–] Kethal 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

People had similar responses to the ideas of negative numbers and irrational numbers when they were identified. There's a story that a follower of Pythagoras was drown for identifying irrational numbers. I suspect it's not true, but certainly it seems people had a hard time grasping the concept.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago

Wearing masks to not catch diseases when treating patients.

[–] xylogx 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Many scientific hypotheses started out as what seemed like crazy ideas at the time. When Galileo and Newton challenged the ideas of Aristotle, this was seen as fringe and radical. When Einstein challenged the accepted Newtonian dogma it was seen as scientific heresy at first. These ideas only seem mainstream to us with hindsight.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it

Planck's Principal

https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck%27s_principle

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A study of when different geologists accepted plate tectonics found that older scientists actually adopted it sooner than younger scientists. However, a more recent study on life science researchers found that following the deaths of preeminent researchers, publications by their collaborators rapidly declined while the activity of non-collaborators and the number of new researchers entering their field rose.

So, not really accurate. Throw it on the pile with horseshoe theory.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

Lamarckian Theory was criticised for a long time but now we know it isn't entirely false, epigenetic changes that occur can actually be passed on.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] randon31415 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago

I think an interesting one (that is still controversial) is that megakaryocytes(MKs) in the lung actually produce a significant amount of the platelets in your body. Rather than platelets all coming from bone marrow MKs. It is interesting because these two different platelet origins have different responses to infection.

[–] RBWells 15 points 2 months ago

This does seem to happen in medicine and nutrition, things that start on the fringe sometimes move to the mainstream. I thought my lunatic ex was out of his mind when he said fasting could heal disease, but it turns out it can, just not in the universal magical way he thought.

[–] idiomaddict 14 points 2 months ago (5 children)

Epigenetics vindicates a small portion of the theory behind Lamarckism, though there’s still a lot of research to be done to understand the actual mechanisms underlying it

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The idea that rocks sometimes fall from the sky.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] flop_leash_973 12 points 2 months ago

"Fringe" ideas are discovered to be fact a lot of the time. Nearly everything that is known to the true in the modern world started out as "some quack theory".

The difference is in how those that think of the "quack theory" go about investigating their theory and respond to the results of that investigation. And whether someone responds honestly or not to that has a lot more to do with them as a person than it does what field of study they come from.

load more comments
view more: next ›