yielding a serious clinical tool

NewAmerica

Senior Member
Mandarin
Does "serious" here mean "important"? It sounds not natural to me.

Thanks in advance

*****************************
Clinical outcome studies of penicillin’s efficacy in different bacteria have allowed us to predict which bacteria penicillin can effectively kill, yielding a serious clinical tool to guide antibiotic therapy in patients.

-Scientific American

Source
 
  • JulianStuart

    Senior Member
    English (UK then US)
    I shudder to think what the opposite would be — a facetious clinical tool?
    Given that this blog entry is the rebuttal to a critique of the writer's earlier article (the article suggests that neuroscience is a useful tool) we need to read the background. A quote from the blog
    "Another example Neuroskeptic used to minimize the relevance of neuroscience to clinical care was drug discovery: “The big discoveries in psychiatric medications were driven by serendipity, not through mechanism-based research.”"
    So here the Neuroskeptic suggested/implied that "neuroscience is not a serious tool" in clinical care, and the blog writer illustrates the argument saying the studies on antibiotics yielded a serious tool - not the kind of frivolous tool that Neuroskeptic thinks neuroscience is when treating patient.

    So yes, serious here is meant as the opposite of frivolous or useless.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top