Buy A Shredder; Destroy The Evidence!

A recent university graduation featured the doctoral research of several candidates. Many of the topics were of the Really?!?! variety. Basically foating in a limbo somewhere between So what? and Who cares? By far, the theme mas popular was ". . . evidence-based . . ." I was a bit startled. Is "evidence-based" the new politically correct term for "data-driven"? Or, is it possible that all the other studies were not based on evidence? Nothing would surprise me. The rapidity with which one medical study contradicts the last one, which had discredited the one preceding might just indicate that none of the research is based on a reliable and comprehensive body of evidence. Putting aside whether or not to eat eggs, or butter. Forgetting that caffeine is either lethal or beneficial. Not caring that red wine is a health boon or a gateway drug. I am not sure that evidence-based is in any way distinguishable from non-evidence-based conclusion sets. Ask yourself this. Are we getting the straight dope from supply chain research and related opinion pieces in the academic and trade press? How much is "evidence-based"? And, how much is based on no credible evidence whatsoever? Here's a tip. One anecdotal example does not constitute evidence. Multiple anecdotes do not necessarily herald a lasting trend. And, knee-jerk response to any of these might not be the best bet on the future.