OT - Ioannidis: Making Medical Science Look Bad Since 2005

[Bruce Weaver]

Some of you might enjoy this essay on the Ioanidis (2005) article in PLoS.

   http://saveyourself.ca/articles/ioannidis.php

Cheers,
Bruce

[Albert-Jan Roskam]

"A substantial portion of its popularity is probably due to how effectively its title can be used to undermine the credibility of science"
Not true, the paper raised awareness, which is direly needed:
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconduct#Individual_cases
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication_bias
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest#Relationship_to_medical_research

Regards,
Albert-Jan


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a
fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


----- Original Message -----

> From: Bruce Weaver <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:49 AM
> Subject: [SPSSX-L] OT - Ioannidis: Making Medical Science Look Bad Since 2005
>
> Some of you might enjoy this essay on the Ioanidis (2005) article in PLoS.
>
>   http://saveyourself.ca/articles/ioannidis.php
>
> Cheers,
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> -----
> --
> Bruce Weaver
> [hidden email]
> http://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/
>
> "When all else fails, RTFM."
>
> NOTE: My Hotmail account is not monitored regularly.
> To send me an e-mail, please use the address shown above.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/OT-Ioannidis-Making-Medical-Science-Look-Bad-Since-2005-tp5718046.html
> Sent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD
>

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD

[Bruce Weaver]

Hi Albert-Jan.  I think Ingraham would agree that increased awareness of bad practices and misconduct is a good thing.  But I think he also would make a clear distinction between science as it is practiced (by fallible humans), and science as it ought to be practiced.  I think his point is that quacks and charlatans want to discredit the scientific method even as it ought to be practiced, because it can be used to "debunk their nonsense".  Here's a relevant quote:

"I like the content of the paper very much, but the title is a misleading generalization that plays right into the hands of quacks and charlatans, who like nothing better than to cite any expert who seems to be saying that science is so flawed — that “science is wrong” — that it can’t be used to debunk their nonsense. This is their sole interest in the paper, and indeed it has been extensively co-opted for this very purpose. A substantial portion of its popularity is probably due to how effectively its title can be used to undermine the credibility of science."

One way to look at it is that it's a double-edged sword: A provocative title creates greater awareness of the article generally.  Some people use the article to highlight flaws in the way science is practiced and thus attempt to improve the practice of science.  Others (the Qs and Cs) use it to try to discredit the scientific method entirely, even as it ought to be practiced.  Maybe you can't have one without the other.

Cheers,
Bruce

Albert-Jan Roskam wrote

"A substantial portion of its popularity is probably due to how effectively its title can be used to undermine the credibility of science"
Not true, the paper raised awareness, which is direly needed:
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconduct#Individual_cases
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publication_bias
--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest#Relationship_to_medical_research

Regards,
Albert-Jan


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a
fresh water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


----- Original Message -----
> From: Bruce Weaver <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 12:49 AM
> Subject: [SPSSX-L] OT - Ioannidis: Making Medical Science Look Bad Since 2005
>
> Some of you might enjoy this essay on the Ioanidis (2005) article in PLoS.
>
>   http://saveyourself.ca/articles/ioannidis.php
>
> Cheers,
> Bruce
>
>
>
>
> -----
> --
> Bruce Weaver
> [hidden email]
> http://sites.google.com/a/lakeheadu.ca/bweaver/
>
> "When all else fails, RTFM."
>
> NOTE: My Hotmail account is not monitored regularly.
> To send me an e-mail, please use the address shown above.
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://spssx-discussion.1045642.n5.nabble.com/OT-Ioannidis-Making-Medical-Science-Look-Bad-Since-2005-tp5718046.html
> Sent from the SPSSX Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> =====================
> To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
> [hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
> command. To leave the list, send the command
> SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
> For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
> INFO REFCARD
>

=====================
To manage your subscription to SPSSX-L, send a message to
[hidden email] (not to SPSSX-L), with no body text except the
command. To leave the list, send the command
SIGNOFF SPSSX-L
For a list of commands to manage subscriptions, send the command
INFO REFCARD