this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2023
124 points (94.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43946 readers
607 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Billions of women in the world east of Europe all the way to Japan would disagree with you. But then again it's the bidet shower variety.
It's not really an opinion, bidets are associated with abnormal vaginal flora and preterm birth.
Your linked study is done with 212 subjects. 212!
With a population that small, you can have any conclusion you'd like. There are billions of people who use bidet showers daily in the world, your study has 212!
If you believe in the scientific method, you should know that a study has to be verified by many independent studies with big enough data samples before it is accepted as fact. You must surely know that there are studies that conclude that the climate change is a hoax. But the overwhelmingly majority makes these handful outliers or flawed studies.
Sigh, I was wondering if this particular misunderstanding of statistics had migrated from reddit to here.
No, you cannot dismiss a study because it "only" has 212 people. 200 people is enough to get an 85% confidence level.
On top of that, it is hardly the only study showing vaginal microflora alteration in bidet users:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21058441/
I get there is a cult of bidet users who will hear no slander of them, but it's not going to make me spray water from my toilet seat and around my vulva and potentially into my vagina. You are not changing my mind on this and I invite you to read more about sample sizes if you want to do something productive: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6970301/
Your first study has even used women who had admitted to the hospital and therefore used the shared hospital toilet bidets. I think this fact alone would make it enough to disqualify it.
Apart from hospital bidet being a one extra germ filled surface the patient touches, it raises the following questions. Was there a problem with the brand of bidet used in the hospital that might cause more of an uncontrolled spray? Did the particular toilet bowl shape contribute to the result? Non of these stays the same within the general population and any outliers would be cancelled out in a huge dataset.