Article How Scientific American went from fighting pseudoscience to platforming it

[C C]

https://beyondtheabstract.substack.com/p...-went-from

EXCERPTS: Much as I don’t go to POLITICO to learn about black holes, or Sports Illustrated for movie reviews, I didn’t subscribe to Scientific American to be told what conclusions I should reach on political issues. [...] I stumbled upon a hard copy of the October 2025 issue in a waiting room and began reading. Inside it, I found a piece that highlighted a study claiming that tongue photographs, analyzed by machine learning, could diagnose diseases.

Inside it, I found a piece that highlighted a study claiming that tongue photographs, analyzed by machine learning, could diagnose diseases. My immediate reaction was: This can’t be serious. Tongue-reading has a long history in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), and while it can be culturally meaningful, its scientific basis has never passed basic clinical scrutiny... (MORE - details)

[Yazata]

I agree with this author's view regarding this particular article about "AI" obfuscation of traditional Chinese medicine. And I agree with his dislike of Scientific American's politicization.

But I will say that I think that Scientific American has been improving gradually since Laura Helmuth, the last editor in chief, was forced to resign. Last month's issue was almost worthwhile reading. Scientific American still isn't close to what it used to be in its glory days, but at least it's better than it recently was.