My macroeconomics professor claimed

According to one researcher, only one in seven medical interventions is supported by reliable scientific evidence.

A quick Google search shows the quote from the book Macroeconomics: A Contemporary Approach. However, the book just refers to another source. Is this claim actually verifiable?

  • 2
    For the benefit of use casual readers, what exactly do you mean by "medical interventions" – Sam I am says Reinstate Monica Jan 8 '15 at 17:13
  • 3
    The "another source" cited in the book is this article which says, "That assumption is so far off the mark that the term "medical science" is practically an oxymoron. Dr. David Eddy of the Jackson Hole Group has estimated that no more than 15 percent of medical interventions are supported by reliable scientific evidence. ... "It's more of an art form than a science form," he said. ... Because of individual variations among patients and physicians, clinical medicine will always be in large measure an art, and that is a good thing." – ChrisW Jan 8 '15 at 17:54
  • The example of "not scientific" given in the book is that "nobody really knows" how acetaminophen works. – ChrisW Jan 8 '15 at 21:26

Browse other questions tagged .