colin (guest) 31 Dec 2013 13:20
http://www.bmj.com/content/321/7259/471
"The objective results reinforce earlier evidence that homoeopathic dilutions differ from placebo."
Poor Man's Scientific Method / Discussion
Forum
» Hidden / Per page discussions
» Poor Man's Scientific Method
This is the discussion related to the wiki page Poor Man's Scientific Method.
colin (guest) 31 Dec 2013 13:20
see "Bad Pharma" and TRUST …
Ben Goldacre: What doctors don't know about the drugs they prescribe
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/ben_goldacre_what_doctors_don_t_know_about_the_drugs_they_prescribe.html
A nice talk about publication bias against negative results. It is an example of a problem that is commonly understood as a political one ("bad pharma") rather than scientific one ("sloppy methodology").
I believe we should strive for the latter.
"The methodology was flawed," is much stronger and actionable complaint than "the company that performed the trial is evil."
I guess you have a master's/doctor's degree in computer science.
I dropped out of a graduate school before admission and never learned a proper scientific method.
Yes, I have a master's degree. I never finished my PhD. But now that I think of it, the scientifc method as such was taught as part of optional curriculum (philosophy of science or such). Which means tthat people can get their master's degree without being directly confronted with the scientific method. Too bad.
some vaccine critics publications:
Do aluminum vaccine adjuvants contribute to the rising prevalence of autism?
Published by Elsevier Inc. ; http://www.omsj.org/reports/tomljenovic%202011.pdf
Lupus (2012) 21, 223–230 :
Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations
http://www.vaccineliberationarmy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/LTShaw-Lupus-2012-Mechanism-of-adjuvant-toxicity-in-pediatric-populations.pdf
Annals of Medicine, 2011; Early Online, 1–12
Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?
http://dropbox.curry.com/ShowNotesArchive/2012/01/NA-382-2012-02-12/Assets/Vaccine$/Annals%20of%20Medicine%20HPV.pdf
Current Medicinal Chemistry, 2011, 18, 2630-2637
Aluminum Vaccine Adjuvants: Are they Safe?
http://vaccinexchange.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/tomljenovic_shaw-cmc-published2.pdf
and other problem
Harvard University:
Institutional Corruption and Pharmaceutical Policy
Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics
Vol. 41, No. 3 (2013)
http://www.ethics.harvard.edu/lab/featured/325-jlme-symposium
favorite:
"Donald W. Light, Joel Lexchin, Jonathan J. Darrow, Institutional Corruption of Pharmaceuticals and the Myth of Safe and Effective Drugs"
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2282014
"Abstract:
Over the past 35 years, patients have suffered from a largely hidden epidemic of side effects from drugs that usually have few offsetting benefits. The pharmaceutical industry has corrupted the practice of medicine through its influence over what drugs are developed, how they are tested, and how medical knowledge is created. Since 1906, heavy commercial influence has compromised Congressional legislation to protect the public from unsafe drugs. The authorization of user fees in 1992 has turned drug companies into the FDA’s prime clients, deepening the regulatory and cultural capture of the agency. Industry has demanded shorter average review times and, with less time to thoroughly review evidence, increased hospitalizations and deaths have resulted. Meeting the needs of the drug companies has taken priority over meeting the needs of patients. Unless this corruption of regulatory intent is reversed, the situation will continue to deteriorate. We offer practical suggestions including: separating the funding of clinical trials from their conduct, analysis, and publication: independent FDA leadership; full public funding for all FDA activities; measures to discourage R&D on drugs with few if any new clinical benefits; and the creation of a National Drug Safety Board."
Nice piece, but I disagree that we necessarily need scientific "ambassadors". I'm not saying people should be their own doctors, those people are trained and have experience in their field, but there are important public decisions to be made, whereby voters should thoroughly understand the science to make an informed vote.
The basics of the scientific method, and it's results should be taught to the general public, especially as we move forward with more evidence-based policy-making.
We need to base our policies on realistic model of the world (where most people don't have time, resources or even will to dive into scientific discourse) rather than the idealistic one.
That's what I mean by making the policies themselves part of the scientific method.
Unfortunately, there's no good answer. The fact is that without personally knowing the scientists involved, there remains the possibility that they or their publishers were influenced by big money. There's no way for the common person to tell. I would however trust Canadian doctors over American ones, based on what seems a higher resistance to big pharma, corruption and better regulation. I for one believe the dogmatic push for flu shots is suspect and not good for otherwise healthy, young individuals.
When post-scarcity societies show themselves, this problem will be solved.
Obviously, in post-scarcity societies, most people have a lot of time to research their problems. People with ample of time will be attracted to scientific methods to prove anything as rich europeans in the middle age were.
I guess post-scarcity societies will become common after 100~200 years.
Unless we have time for scientific methods or some internet researches, we have to trust some groups of people who've proven competent in solving problems of interests(like doctors and scientists).
Unfold
When post-scarcity societies show themselves, this problem will be solved. by 
crocket, 01 Jan 2014 09:24
Re: When post-scarcity societies show themselves, this problem will be solved.
I am afraid you are too optimistic. I believe we are long past the point when a single human being could exhaustively research all problems they encounter in their day-to-day life, even if they spend all their waking time trying to.
Re: When post-scarcity societies show themselves, this problem will be solved.
Of course, we are long past that point.
However, if people's children catch a lethal disease that's curable by some research, most people will be able to research the disease. I don't remember the specific case, but it happened in real life decades ago. Likewise, people will have time to focus on a few important problems in their lives. And this, I guess, will restore research culture that's lost after USA sent people to the moon.
Unfold
Re: When post-scarcity societies show themselves, this problem will be solved. by 
crocket, 02 Jan 2014 06:37
/forum/t-756300/poor-man-s-scientific-method#post-
