Oct 7, 2026 · 27 min · 10 segments
Send us Fan Mail During the research I was conducting for my latest book My Blood Sugar is High, I came across the…
Asher LarmieHost

I, I, uh, which, uh, as someone who is very keen to have their own [laughs] Wikipedia page, and that's not as easy as it sounds.

I have f- o- only ever come across it, uh, in one paper that was published on the 29th of December, 2024, uh, in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, um, by Filippo D'Amico.

Uh, ha- ha- have you ever heard me read an abstract from a, from a paper in, in, in a podcast before? Probably not.

I have not read the actual paper, but that's not relevant because all we care about here is the observation interpretation f- interpretation fallacy.

The observational interpretation fallacy is a term that I believe they've coined.

So we all know that association is not causation, right? They're not the same thing, and we all know that assuming that associ- association somehow proves causation is a logical fallacy.

"The differentiation between association and causation is a significant challenge in medical research, often further complicated by cognitive biases that erroneously interpret coincidental observational data as indicative of causality." Hmm.

Is this ringing any bells by any chance? "Such misrepresentations can lead to misguided clinical guidelines and healthcare practice, potentially endangering patient safety and leading to inefficient use of resources." [gasps] [exhales] Some of us have been saying this for a while, certainly before the 29th of December, 2024.


I, I, uh, which, uh, as someone who is very keen to have their own [laughs] Wikipedia page, and that's not as easy as it sounds.

I have f- o- only ever come across it, uh, in one paper that was published on the 29th of December, 2024, uh, in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, um, by Filippo D'Amico.

Uh, ha- ha- have you ever heard me read an abstract from a, from a paper in, in, in a podcast before? Probably not.

I have not read the actual paper, but that's not relevant because all we care about here is the observation interpretation f- interpretation fallacy.

The observational interpretation fallacy is a term that I believe they've coined.

So we all know that association is not causation, right? They're not the same thing, and we all know that assuming that associ- association somehow proves causation is a logical fallacy.

"The differentiation between association and causation is a significant challenge in medical research, often further complicated by cognitive biases that erroneously interpret coincidental observational data as indicative of causality." Hmm.

Is this ringing any bells by any chance? "Such misrepresentations can lead to misguided clinical guidelines and healthcare practice, potentially endangering patient safety and leading to inefficient use of resources." [gasps] [exhales] Some of us have been saying this for a while, certainly before the 29th of December, 2024.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.