141–150 of 169 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They do a Randomized Controlled Trial on parachutes, but due to ethical reasons the plane is only a few feet off the ground and there's no effect (the parachutes don't have time to deploy).
Are you under the impression there would be an effect on trauma rates if the parachute managed to deploy during a 60cm jump?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Makes me wonder if a bunch of the world's smallest flightless mammal (a fraction of the house mouse's mass) were released at altitude, would they survive? (Not proposing that this be done but thought experiments and/or simulations): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_shrew
“As god is my witness I thought turkeys could fly” https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lf3mgmEdfwg
I think people misunderstand what evidence based medicine is[0]. There are many types of evidence ranging from lab studies and expert opinion at the bottom to systematic reviews/meta-analyses at the top. The point being that we should strive for RCTs when possible , and that RCTs carry more weight than expert opinion or case-control. Many (I don’t have an exact number) clinical practice guidelines are based on expert…
(Corrected)
I think people misunderstand what evidence based medicine is[0]. There are many types of evidence ranging from lab studies and expert opinion at the bottom to systematic reviews/meta-analyses at the top. The point being that we should strive for RCTs when possible , and that RCTs carry more weight than expert opinion or case-control. Many (I don’t have an exact number) clinical practice guidelines are based on expert…
A big problem is that humans have a preference for action, and a dislike of waiting for information.
Many flawed guidelines are based on a desire to act even in the absence of evidence of benefit.
"Primum non nocere" is probably the most accepted but least respected tenant of good medical practice.
I think people misunderstand what evidence based medicine is[0]. There are many types of evidence ranging from lab studies and expert opinion at the bottom to systematic reviews/meta-analyses at the top. The point being that we should strive for RCTs when possible , and that RCTs carry more weight than expert opinion or case-control. Many (I don’t have an exact number) clinical practice guidelines are based on expert…
(Saved you a search: Randomized Controlled Trial) (Corrected)
Controlled means there is a control arm that get no treatment, or treatment as usual (depending on what's needed).
Ideally a Db-rct a doubly blinded randomised controlled trial.
I think people misunderstand what evidence based medicine is[0]. There are many types of evidence ranging from lab studies and expert opinion at the bottom to systematic reviews/meta-analyses at the top. The point being that we should strive for RCTs when possible , and that RCTs carry more weight than expert opinion or case-control. Many (I don’t have an exact number) clinical practice guidelines are based on expert…
(Saved you a search: Randomized Controlled Trial) (Corrected)
I meant "randomized controlled trial" in this case (as the post). "Randomized clinical trial" is often used interchangeably but does not necessarily require a control group (e.g. a non-inferiority study comparing two different treatments).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At altitude it's very cold, the shrews don't work well in the cold due to the same thing that makes them suitable for this experiment - they are very small, thus they lose heat to the environment easily. So, it's possible they freeze to death first. But yes, I imagine that if they survive the cold and aren't falling onto a hard surface (e.g. they land in grass, not a car park) they would survive. For them other than…
Research is obviously warranted on the possibility of shrew blankets that can automatically detach when they touch down.
However, shrew blankets change the whole scenario to irrelevance--a shrew in a blanket sufficient to keep it safe has very different aerodynamic behavior than a naked shrew.
I came to leave a snarky joke comment about "in mice?", and then I remembered that mice don't actually need parachutes because their terminal velocity is roughly the same as a human using a parachute [1]. If someone actually ran the study with mice, they'd find that parachutes aren't necessary! 1: https://johnmjennings.com/can-a-mouse-survive-a-fall-from-a-...
The fact that mice don't appear to deliberately jump off high things as a way to get down tells me that they probably do get hurt... Just because they don't fall super fast doesn't mean they don't get injured because they don't have as much distance to "drop and roll" like a human does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The fact that mice don't appear to deliberately jump off high things as a way to get down tells me that they probably do get hurt... Just because they don't fall super fast doesn't mean they don't get injured because they don't have as much distance to "drop and roll" like a human does.
> The fact that mice don't appear to deliberately jump off high things as a way to get down tells me that they probably do get hurt... It's not how this works, cats are decent swimmers yet they generally refuse to get anywhere close to water…