Editors of World’s Most Prestigious Medical Journals: “Much of the Scientific Literature, Perhaps HALF, May Simply Be Untrue"...

  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jun 02, 2015 2:12 AM GMT
    the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2009/jan/15/drug-companies-doctorsa-story-of-corruption/

    and last month, from Lancet (pdf file):

    http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1.pdf

    "Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness. As one participant put it, “poor methods get results”. The Academy of Medical Sciences, Medical Research Council, and Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council have now put their reputational weight behind an investigation into these questionable research practices. The apparent endemicity [i.e. pervasiveness within the scientific culture] of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours. Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of “significance” pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale. We reject important confirmations. Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent, endpoints that foster reductive metrics, such as high-impact publication. National assessment procedures, such as the Research Excellence Framework, incentivise bad practices. And individual scientists, including their most senior leaders, do little to alter a research culture that occasionally veers close to misconduct."
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jun 02, 2015 2:29 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidThank goodness all the global warming, er, I mean "climate change" literature is all true and based on sound science.


    the 2 articles refer to medical science
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 02, 2015 2:32 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidThank goodness all the global warming, er, I mean "climate change" literature is all true and based on sound science.
    Only half of it. The other half was published by Republicans who think it's totally ok to pollute the environment as long as someone gets rich from it.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14389

    Jun 02, 2015 2:55 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    tj85016 said
    southbeach1500 saidThank goodness all the global warming, er, I mean "climate change" literature is all true and based on sound science.


    the 2 articles refer to medical science


    Exactly, which is why I'm so happy that this is just restricted to medical science and that the global warming, uh, did it again, "climate change" predictions are all based on sound data.
    Don't worry, the jury is still out on that one.icon_razz.gif
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Jun 02, 2015 7:26 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    tj85016 said
    southbeach1500 saidThank goodness all the global warming, er, I mean "climate change" literature is all true and based on sound science.


    the 2 articles refer to medical science


    Exactly, which is why I'm so happy that this is just restricted to medical science and that the global warming, uh, did it again, "climate change" predictions are all based on sound data.


    At the foundation of this 6 year old study is the ways all sciences are influenced and corrupted by money. Anyone who doesn’t believe this has happened and is happening with global warming science is either a liar or delusional.

    The corruption surrounding the entire global warming ‘industry’ was first being exposed about the time this study was done and the book was published. It started with this statement from candidate Obama in 2008. (31 seconds)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNSZ62xiD4M

    People began investigating and found that Obama had diverted $1.1 million from the Joyce Foundation to starting the Chicago Climate Exchange conceived by infamous stock market manipulator Richard Sandor to form “Carbon Exchanges” handle carbon credit trading worldwide. Sandor pulled a Jonathan Gruber and bragged on television the Climate Exchanges would be a $10 trillion a year industry. That led to finding out that the former vice president who put together a movie called, “An Inconvenient Truth” was the fifth largest investor in the Chicago Climate Exchange that would handle all the carbon trading for the USA.
    [url]http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/042810-531731-the-10-trillion-climate-fraud.htm
    [/url]
    Gore founded Generation Investment Management with three of his buddies from Goldman Sachs strictly to profit off Cap and Trade through the Climate Exchanges. That led to finding out who all the investors were, and they were a cast of characters, like Sandor, - ‘the father of stock market derivatives and futures’ that are the cause of every Wall Street bubble since…. George Soros, who collapsed the Bank of England, was tried and convicted for doing the same thing in France and is wanted in Russia for doing it a third time… Maurice Stand, Felix Rohatyn, and the whole cast of Wall Street and international bankers who manipulate economies.

    “The biggest losers are CCX's two biggest investors, Al Gore's Generation Investment Management and Goldman Sachs, that champion of sound money management that serves as the farm team for (US government) administration staffing.”
    [url]http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/110910-553236-the-crash-of-the-climate-exchange.htm#ixzz3bvwxfjsC
    [/url]

    So stop being stupid about Global Warming being based in “pure science” and not corrupted by the same things that have corrupted the healthcare industry. It already has.

  • Lincsbear

    Posts: 2605

    Jun 02, 2015 10:29 PM GMT
    The article detailing the corrupt relationship between private drug companies and the medical profession is pretty bad. As it states, though, the behaviour of the latter is worse. They should not be driven by money or profit; you can expect it of those companies. There needs to be a drive to reduce private money in the medical profession. Its money is destructive to good science.
    There`s often too much at stake for the scientific community to apply that most valuable of attitudes to research, skepticism, be it money, prestige, university funding, etc.
    I think this modern tendency to look for quick results to turn into marketable technologies plays a role, too.
    The media also distort things in dramatizing and simplifying research results, preferring the clear and dramatic over the complex and nuanced. Their insistence on concision is bad for explaining science and research.
    Science is ultimately a provisional enterprise and much of its findings will fail in time with better research, etc., so maybe we should be prepared to read of its 'truths' falling occasionally.
  • Apparition

    Posts: 3534

    Jun 02, 2015 10:43 PM GMT
    research should never be read to or reported by anyone not capable of a BSc at least.
  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jun 02, 2015 10:58 PM GMT
    Apparition saidresearch should never be read to or reported by anyone not capable of a BSc at least.


    oh right, shoot the messenger or hang the consumer for trying to make sense of rigged, garbage research that they think might benefit them
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2939

    Jun 03, 2015 12:19 AM GMT
    paulflexes said
    southbeach1500 saidThank goodness all the global warming, er, I mean "climate change" literature is all true and based on sound science.
    Only half of it. The other half was published by Republicans who think it's totally ok to pollute the environment as long as someone gets rich from it.


    +1