I have to disagree, medicine is evidence based.
Like any science, medical knowledge moves on, the treatment of yesterday is not the treatment of today. Like any profession medicine has its stick in the muds, who are reluctant to change and the are always differences in opinion of how to best address a problem.
The press has a lot to answer for as they have a tendency to jump on the band wagon of one study, whether it is widely accepted or not.
That is true. MMR/Wakefield is a case in point.
The media tends to want to make money, it does so by selling copy, or gaining clicks to sell adverts. Headlines and exageration are itās raison dāetre.
Medicine should be evidence based. Agreed.
But too much of it still isnāt. Be it historical hangovers, or bad clinical trials some is still based on bad evidence.
Yes again. It should be getting past opinion, and looking at evidence.
This has really gone of track from my postā
I am a scientist by profession and interpretation of results is probably the most contentious subject. The most important questions to ask are; is what I see real, am I investing what I think I am investigating, how should I interpret the results, will it stand up to peer review etc. You will find many opinions of how to read the evidence.
OK, That is a fair point.
But when there is a lot of disagreement is that not a sign that the evidence is lacking?
Does not plentiful, high quality evidence, reduce the scope for opinion?
OK.
What would get me to go back to the UK? Nothing, but I have other places to go.
Yep. I am fairly new here, but have noticed that when the original query/subject has been answered/discussed then the thread does wander off in all sorts of directions.
Just like conversations around the dinner tableā¦ topics wander hither and thither. 
I was a bit confused by that when I was new as well. Once the dinner party conversation concept was explained to me, it made sense. 
Yes.
The example you gave took time to build the evidence, it references 20-years of IRM data, IRM machines are relatively recent invention and have only become common over the last 20-years or so.
Which is why people like me donāt often get involved.
Thatās fine, but I do sometimes feel like people should be a bit moreā¦ responsible perhaps, in understanding that massive thread drift can not only harm the original purpose of the thread by hiding the relevant information, but also hides the drift that should perhaps be highlighted with itās own thread. Thereās a thread about Pastel de Nata where the comments about Pastel de Nata are probably less than 10% of the total at this point, the rest is about nutrition or such. Slide the nutrition talk into its own thread then people can find it from the title. I strongly disagree with the idea that all comments should be on topic, thread drift is natural and helps the flow of the site, but when itās to that sort of degree it probably should have had its own thread to start with.
What Iām not too keen on is when a useful topic gets buried in bad puns - they need a pun of the day thread of their own
But then I miss the British sense of humour, and that would be a pull to go back.
Yep. Some threads do meander around the centre line but cross and recross it; others do seem to spin off at tangents into totally different directions.
It is a difficult balancing act for moderators to allow some side comments, but also recognise when one of them is stronger than the original trunk. Allow offshoots to give depth, but repot stronger growths. (Gosh, what a tortuous metaphor, sorry 
)
Anywayā¦here we areā¦ discussing forum etiquette and off topic comments, on the Return to UK thread! 
Depends on the thread topic for me. Iād prefer that the advisory legal or financial stuff should stay broadly on topic. I know I got a bit miffed when I saw an update on one such thread (one I keep an eye on) only to find it had wandered a little too far off track for my liking. Or perhaps I was having a bad day. That happens too.
As a pal of mine in the US says, "if in doubt, whup it outā.
The most common operation in the US?
A walletectomy.
Agreed. I remember Graham who used to do a splendid job of supporting those doing their annual tax returns (pre-dates George) who asked that his thread could be kept on topic - that seemed to work.
Whether Pastel de Nata needs to be kept on topic I doubt. Any more than āwhat would make you go back to the UKā - discussion about nutrition and science rambles all over the place and crops up anywhere, because there are a few on here who are vehement about the topic. You canāt keep a good man down. As Iāve said elsewhere, the moderation here is light - thank goodness.
I donāt think moderation is needed, none of the forums Iāve run have a lever been anything other than light touch because it very rarely is actually needed, people who tell you otherwise quite often just donāt have a very good forum, or they want the behaviour theyāre complaining about, I just think sometimes we could all āself moderateā in a sense and realise that the conversation is valuable enough to have itās own thread rather than just midway through another, sometimes entirely irrelevant one.
A German friend of ours has now been diagnosed with it. I had a look and found a list of places in Germany that do the radiotherapy treatment. The German health service covers it.They do it all over the place.
I also remember seeing a video of a Doctor piercing it several times with a needle, and the fingers were flexible again immediately.