Aswad
Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007 Status: offline
|
SusanofO, There are some fairly good studies out there, like the Danish study I mentioned, which covered every male that was born in Denmark that year... about 43.000 or so, IIRC. But, yes, there is every reason to be jaded about some of this stuff. There are so many agendas in the field that one couldn't even begin to call it science, in most cases. Just consider the case of [Rind et al 1998]... They had the audacity to challenge the status quo by carefully picking a demographically representative sample and applying solid and rigorous science and math to it. In return, the paper drew fire from absolutely all directions, even getting the dubious "honour" of being the first paper to be unanimously condemned by congress. The paper passed the initial peer review. It has been concluded by later reviews to be scientifically solid, and the lead reviewing body in the USA not only refused to review it on the grounds that it was too solid to merit another critical review, but also commented on just how concerned they were about people's reactions to the paper. It's been listed as controversial many places, but it isn't any more controversial than scientific method itself. The entire controversy comes from people reading more into it than the authors put into it, as well as it giving solid, scientific refutation of the basic assumptions of an entire field of so-called "science", as well as systematically pointing out five well-known forms of bias that had come to infest every "acceptable" publication in the field. I won't comment on the topic of the paper, as that might be in conflict with the ToS for CM, but the topic isn't really the point, either. The point is this... The bonfires are here. Where are the descendants of the brave scientists who dared say the Earth was round, not flat, and that it orbited the Sun, not the other way around, ready to be burned for their beliefs? There's more than one new witch-hunt in this day and age, and we have the hypocrisy to look back on the one in the middle-ages and say "that's how silly and barbaric they were back then", without thinking about the "witches" metaphorically roasting in our own back yards. At least in the middle ages, they had the excuse of ignorance; there is no such redeeming factor in this day and age. They couldn't know better. We choose not to. So, yeah, I'm rather skeptical about anything that comes out of that machine nowadays. Modern "science", in the fields that aren't very distant to people's lives and very easily quantifiable, is a parody. Although there are some good studies in these fields. I don't have a background in research, but I've read approximately 100.000 pages of research papers on psychopharmacology and its use in the treatment of depression, for instance. And that certainly taught me a thing or two about healthy skepticism.
|