Abstract
In current philosophical discussions on evidence in the medical sciences, epidemiology has been used to exemplify a specific version of evidential pluralism. According to this view, known as the Russo–Williamson Thesis, evidence of both difference-making and mechanisms is produced to make causal claims in the health sciences. In this paper, I present an analysis of data and evidence in epidemiological practice, with a special focus on research on the exposome, and I cast doubt on the extent to which evidential pluralism holds in this case. I start by focusing on the claim that molecular data allows for the production of mechanistic evidence. On the basis of a close look at the ways in which molecular data is used in exposome research, I caution against interpretations in terms of mechanistic evidence. Secondly, I expand my critical remarks on the thesis by addressing the conditions under which data is categorised as evidence in exposome research. I argue that these show that the classification of a dataset as a type of evidence is dependent on the ways in which the data is used. This is in contrast with the approach of evidential pluralism, where evidence is classified in different types on the basis of its intrinsic properties. Finally, I come back to what I consider the core of the thesis and suggest that the epidemiological research analysed in the paper indicates different interpretations of evidential pluralism and its applicability in the health sciences.
Highlights
Evidence is a notion that we associate with multiple activities of our societies, including journalism, law, criminal investigations, etc
I present an analysis of data and evidence in epidemiological practice, with a special focus on research on the exposome, and I cast doubt on the extent to which evidential pluralism holds in this case
The use of molecular data in exposome research has been interpreted as the production of mechanistic evidence, which is considered necessary by the RWT to support a causal claim
Summary
Evidence is a notion that we associate with multiple activities of our societies, including journalism, law, criminal investigations, etc. Philosophers of science have recently turned their attention to epidemiology and related problems, including: the notion of cause in epidemiology (Russo 2009; De Vreese 2009); the causal interpretation of epidemiological results (Broadbent 2013); causal explanations (Campaner 2011); and the consequences of methodological novelties on causal inference (Broadbent 2015; Vandenbroucke et al 2016) In this context, the RWT has played an important role, connecting philosophical work on epidemiology with the broader debate on medical evidence, where epidemiology had. The exposome approach combines data on the molecular and external environment to study the internal and external components of exposure and improve the assessment of disease risks associated with environmental elements It has recently attracted significant attention and has been used as a source of examples in the literature on the RWT (Russo and Williamson 2012; Russo and Vineis 2016). I focus on the ways in which data is used and
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
