Live data from Hacker News

How many medical studies are faked or flawed?

web.archive.org

1–10 of 257 posts

Re: How many medical studies are faked or flawed?

#9
post #5

Pretty sure most studies about the effects of coffee and red wine are flawed.

why coffee and red wine specifically?

Both of those are substances that should be harmful based on the effects of the major ingredients: e.g. caffeine is addictive and when I am deprived of it my schizotypy flares up and I have paranoid episodes (I yell at my wife “why the hell are you always standing where I want to go next?”) I have had two doctors tell me three other reasons why I should quit.

Look in the medical literature and it seems outright spammed by reports on the positive effects of caffeine and negative reports on any of the harmful effects one would expect.

Similarly the main active ingredient of red wine (alcohol) is harmful, red wine in particular causes a lot of discomfort, dispepsia, hangovers and other unpleasant effects if you get a bad vintage but look the literature and it is like it will transport you to a blue zone and you will love forever.

And you find those kind of papers spammed in “real” journals, not MDPI or “Frontiers” journals.

Re: How many medical studies are faked or flawed?

#10

Those are two wildly different things. Most things are flawed. Deliberately fabricating results is anathema to advancing science.

Yes I work with these IPD spreadsheets every day and they all have typos often in the time/date column (issues with midnight and new years are very common) this can result in an erroneous reporting of something like average drug exposure or clearance if 1 or 2 subjects have uncaught errors in the reported data

I would expect 26% or more studies have these flaws but faked data is a different thing entirely and 26% fake would be incredibly worrying

Post reply on HN