Using science to argue your case

magerum

In for the inevitable disbelief in science.

Dude! You're late to the party!

Story of my life. :grumble:

CapnGordo

Just kidding.

ThickMcRunFast

Wait, I can sum up better:

Science is:



while anecdotes are

brower47

There is a lot of crap in scientific journals too, and peer reviewed ones at that.

Quacks have their own journals with very convincing looking 'studies'.

Most studies in peer reviewed journals can't ever be repeated.

Yes. The public at large doesn't seem to grasp exactly how messed up the peer review process can be.

And yet it's leaps and bounds above bro science, conspiracy theories and other crap that hasn't been reviewed AT ALL. I'll stick with peer reviewed over anything else everyday, all day.

Mariposa_Lily

Snark aside, I am a neuroscientist and I am genuinely curious why the general public does not trust science/peer review, and what you trust instead. It makes me sad to see that people basically think that my life's work is worthless.

Also, serious offer, if anyone on here wants help with reading and interpreting any particular research article, please PM me, I'm happy to help. Sometimes if you only read the abstract, that's not helpful. The most important sections are the methods and results.

I think we have the media to thank for the mistrust. The media outlets lie about studies all the time.

Laypeople also think that, just because one study is later shown have led to erroneous conclusions, that makes it "bad science." It doesn't. My dad (a retired geology prof) taught things early in his career that have now been shown to be patently false or untrue. Was the science bad? Was he a poor teacher for passing those things on? No! His understanding of things at the time was based on the best information available at the time. As more information because available, however, conclusions changed, and so he changed what he taught. That's the essence of science.

So, in nutrition, the fact that at some point "science" was supporting or decrying certain things and now has reversed itself doesn't mean the earlier stuff was "bad science." It was good science, and now it's even better. That's the process. Can it be confusing or frustrating to be told to take this vitamin or eat/avoid this food, now don't, now do, now don't? Of course! But recommendations change as more information comes in; that's a fact of life that I wish more people understood.

mrmagee3

And yet it's leaps and bounds above bro science, conspiracy theories and other crap that hasn't been reviewed AT ALL. I'll stick with peer reviewed over anything else everyday, all day.

I never said that the alternatives were better (and have said the opposite several times). I object to the idea that a study being peer reviewed automatically makes it a strongly supported study, or that the conclusion is "truth", which is what the general public seems to think that it means.

People read too much into individual studies.

BrianSharpe

Laypeople also think that, just because one study is later shown have led to erroneous conclusions, that makes it "bad science." It doesn't. My dad (a retired geology prof) taught things early in his career that have now been shown to be patently false or untrue. Was the science bad? Was he a poor teacher for passing those things on? No! His understanding of things at the time was based on the best information available at the time. As more information because available, however, conclusions changed, and so he changed what he taught. That's the essence of science.

So, in nutrition, the fact that at some point "science" was supporting or decrying certain things and now has reversed itself doesn't mean the earlier stuff was "bad science." It was good science, and now it's even better. That's the process. Can it be confusing or frustrating to be told to take this vitamin or eat/avoid this food, now don't, now do, now don't? Of course! But recommendations change as more information comes in; that's a fact of life that I wish more people understood.

And that's also the difference between science, superstition and pseudoscience. The scientist will accept change as new information becomes available whereas the superstitious and psudoscientists won't change even in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary to their beliefs.

rjmudlax13

But everyone knows that science is controlled by the New World Order, Illuminati, George W. Bush, Freemasons, Al Gore, the Rothchild family, Walmart, Lord Zedd and Scientology in order to form their dream of a global communist fascist banana repuiblic dictatorship.

I know this is true because Alex Jones told me.

srslybritt

Unless it's something I care about with a passion, I'm not going to write a dissertation on an MFP forum; sorry. Even then, I'll be hard-pressed. Truth is, if it's an argumentative subject, some pansy will report it and the thread will get locked anyway, thus wasting my time.

TL;DR, if you expect me to conduct professional research on a public forum, I charge by the hour.


ETA: Not saying I refuse to produce a link or 3, just not going to write every thought/feeling on a subject with sources cited... ain't nobody got time for that.

UsedToBeHusky

TL;DR, if you expect me to conduct professional research on a public forum, I charge by the hour.

Yeah, pretty much this... if you think I'm wrong, then go dig it up yourself!

srslybritt

TL;DR, if you expect me to conduct professional research on a public forum, I charge by the hour.

Yeah, pretty much this... if you think I'm wrong, then go dig it up yourself!

Boom. I almost typed pretty much exactly this. Put those fingers to good use and consult the google machine!

srslybritt

But everyone knows that science is controlled by the New World Order, Illuminati, George W. Bush, Freemasons, Al Gore, the Rothchild family, Walmart, Lord Zedd and Scientology in order to form their dream of a global communist fascist banana repuiblic dictatorship.

I know this is true because Alex Jones told me.

I, too, quote Alex Jones at every possible juncture.

The man is practically a deity, so full of wisdom.

rjmudlax13

But everyone knows that science is controlled by the New World Order, Illuminati, George W. Bush, Freemasons, Al Gore, the Rothchild family, Walmart, Lord Zedd and Scientology in order to form their dream of a global communist fascist banana repuiblic dictatorship.

I know this is true because Alex Jones told me.

I, too, quote Alex Jones at every possible juncture.

The man is practically a deity, so full of wisdom.

Jesse "the body" Ventura is also a reliable source.

theoneandonlybrookie

Perhaps there is some bull**** in peer-reviewed journals, but it's so much better than getting your information from Yahoo News, Huffington Post or, god forbid, Fox.

The studies in peer reviewed journals can be replicated and often are. That's why they list their methodologies in excruciating detail. If there's a discrepancy between the original study and repeated studies, perhaps the methodologies and thus results are flawed. But almost all scientific studies CAN be replicated.

And "because, science" is still a better answer than "because I think so." Sorry. Just because you think it's true doesn't make it a fact.

srslybritt

But everyone knows that science is controlled by the New World Order, Illuminati, George W. Bush, Freemasons, Al Gore, the Rothchild family, Walmart, Lord Zedd and Scientology in order to form their dream of a global communist fascist banana repuiblic dictatorship.

I know this is true because Alex Jones told me.

I, too, quote Alex Jones at every possible juncture.

The man is practically a deity, so full of wisdom.

Jesse "the body" Ventura is also a reliable source.

I trust him unequivocally. He used to be my governor; I am well aware of what an honest man he is.

(As a true Minneostan, I feel obligated to include this disclaimer clearly identifying my sarcasm)

Mariposa_Lily

TL;DR, if you expect me to conduct professional research on a public forum, I charge by the hour.

Yeah, pretty much this... if you think I'm wrong, then go dig it up yourself!

I don't have a problem with that, provided people don't give their unsupported opinion as fact, with vague references to "science" to make themselves seem legit. This is particularly true when people are suggesting going against a doctor's orders, or are castigating someone for what he/she is doing, simply because that person chooses to do something different.

There are lots of people on these forums looking for people to say what they want to hear, or looking for answers but without the education/experience to separate the advice wheat from the advice chaff, so to speak. That's why I think that people that don't include legitimate sources should make suggestions as suggestions based on personal experience, rather than "Truth," and add disclaimers like "I heard X, so you might want to research this further...."

Achrya

Also, if people could just stop saying "Because science" as as answer that would be great

Nope.

Because science.

ajaxe432

Snark aside, I am a neuroscientist and I am genuinely curious why the general public does not trust science/peer review, and what you trust instead. It makes me sad to see that people basically think that my life's work is worthless.

Some areas of study have very strong scientific research, use the scientific method, actually rerun experiments to see if conclusions can be reproduced.... Diet has not really been like that. It's been what 50 years of 1. throw out butter and eat margarine and trans fats instead - followed by 'whoops' 2. Eggs are bad - followed by eggs are good, etc...

People do not trust diet science because we have gotten years of bad science or bad conclusion pushed on the public that did not work. That doesn't mean all science is bad.

Never thought of that! Good observation:)

ajaxe432

But everyone knows that science is controlled by the New World Order, Illuminati, George W. Bush, Freemasons, Al Gore, the Rothchild family, Walmart, Lord Zedd and Scientology in order to form their dream of a global communist fascist banana repuiblic dictatorship.

I know this is true because Alex Jones told me.

I, too, quote Alex Jones at every possible juncture.

The man is practically a deity, so full of wisdom.

Jesse "the body" Ventura is also a reliable source.

As is Terry Hogan!

mikejholmes

Listen to your own body, it's your best advicer and decide for yourself what's best for you!

Erm, demonstrably false, for many people on here. How do you think so many people got to be obese, and needed to get onto a health web site to track what they eat?