Answer:
Question: what can you say about time it takes for one hypothesis to developed and replaced/succeed by another
Answers:
I think it is relatively fast when the hypothesis is tested and rejected.
Case in point: Antiarrhythmic drugs. Through the 1980s, arrhythmias were thought of as something like an itchy heart and antiarrhythmic drugs were a salve meant to stop the itching and thereby prevent an arrhythmia. A huge study was undertaken called CAST (Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Study) to prove the hypothesis. To the shock of the cardiology community, the drugs tested with associated with worse mortality. Instead of making the arrhythmias go away, they were killing people.
Other antiarrhythmic drugs were tested and found to be OK as well as therapies like implantable defibrillators.
So, if the hypothesis is wrong and there are lives to be saved and money to be made, then the new hypotheses are quickly replaced.
#READYTOHELP
