[dhzizns]

“ there's no scientific basis”

Theres no scientific basis for anything until a proper study is done. Doesn't mean it isn't true. And consider that estimates are as high as 50% of scientific papers’ results are false (especially in bio).

N.B.1: I'm a scientist in a government lab

N.B. 2: I’m not impugning science, just fellow scientists.

[driverdan]

What's your point? When you make a medical decision it should be based on the best research done to date. Just because existing research doesn't mean something isn't true isn't a reason to do it.

[passivate]

> And consider that estimates are as high as 50% of scientific papers’ results are false (especially in bio).

Source?

[nradov]

Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

[passivate]

Where is the 50% number? Or are you linking to a random paper? (i.e. not the source for the claim)

[nradov]

Did you even read the paper? "Most" is >50%.

[passivate]

Nope. You don't invent numbers like that. A claim that includes a specific number needs an actual citation which includes the number.

"Most Research Findings Are False for Most Research Designs and for Most Fields" is a ridiculous claim. I don't know a single scientist who believes that. How many scientists have you spoken to in the bio field?

[nradov]

Do you have a substantiave criticism of the paper that I linked?