Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Saturday, May 10. 2014

Why Most Published Research Findings are False

Re-posted


It is not only true in medicine, it applies to all statistical research. Here's Why Most Published Research Findings are False.


1 Boring Old Man has been devoting himself to uncovering the Pharma-Psychiatric research cabal, but nobody is really listening. My rule of thumb is to take everything I read with a a few grains of salt.


Posted by Dr. Joy Bliss in Fallacies and Logic, Our Essays, Psychology, and Dr. Bliss at 14:01 | Comments (10) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Me, I'd use a 5# bag...
#1 Sam L. on 2011-11-30 23:18 (Reply)
found me a wholesale supplier of rocksalt for ice clearing of roads in winter.
They might have enough...
#1.1 J.T. Wenting on 2014-05-10 15:02 (Reply)
In some fields they understand this and have fairly high standards for proof. Like correcting for the "look elsewhere effect" and demanding 5 sigma for a discovery claim. And spending as much time estimating the uncertainty in a measurement as they spent making the measurement.
#2 James the lesser (Link) on 2013-08-25 15:53 (Reply)
Maggie's Farm confuses me - it's just like mainstream media in miniature!

Two days ago it was Dr. Mercury espousing the large effect a low salt diet has had on his blood pressure.

Today it's another Dr., Dr. Bliss, implying everyone should eat a few grains of salt every time they read something!
#3 Harley Cudney on 2013-08-25 21:24 (Reply)
I had the same reaction when I read it. I thought, "Hey, I just finished telling everybody how BAD salt is!" And then she comes along and recommends it...with everything??

This just isn't right!
    #3.1 Dr. Mercury (Link) on 2013-08-26 19:48 (Reply)
    QUOTE:
    My rule of thumb is to take everything I read with a a few grains of salt.


    But, but, but salt is bad for you.

    Oh wait, maybe it's not

    I'm so confused by all of this research.
    #4 phil g on 2013-08-26 13:01 (Reply)
    If you are confused by all this research, I recommend going to the Bonkers Institute for nearly genuine research for an explanation.
    http://www.bonkersinstitute.org/
    #5 Ray on 2013-08-26 16:00 (Reply)
    So it's a statistical fact that most statistical facts are wrong?
    #6 B. Moe on 2014-05-10 15:17 (Reply)
    I think there are a couple of other reasons as well. Of course there is the biased researchers who consciously choose to find/create results that support their beliefs and ignore results which do not. Then there is the problem of putting time and effort into a research project which yields no results so good or bad, right or wrong every research project must have "results" worth publishing. If they didn't do this grant money would dry up. And another reason is statistics lends itself to "lying" or confusion. One researcher's "statistically significant" result is another researcher's noise or outlier. For a lot of reasons statistics appeals to dishonest and power hungry people.
    #7 GoneWithTheWind on 2014-05-10 15:30 (Reply)
    Nine out of ten international experts agree that seventy-five, maybe eighty per cent of all statistics are made up on the spot.
    #8 chasmatic (Link) on 2014-05-11 12:56 (Reply)

    Add Comment
    (Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

    By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
    addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

    Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
    [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

    Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
    E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

    To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
    CAPTCHA

    BBCode format allowed
     
     
    A Chris Southern Consulting website.