How many medical studies are faked or flawed?

Post by LudwigNagasena » Tue, Sep 19, 2023, 6:57 PM UTC

rez9x wrote: post #29

acc_297 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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% fak…

How many studies are faked and how many just have a 'selective outcome'? Almost every nutritional study I read is at some point sponsored by a group that would benefit from a positive (or negative) outcome. I imagine several studies are run and only the one where the conditions led to a desired outcome are actually published. The researchers may know the results are inconsistent and there is an error somewhere, but i…

Post by PaulHoule » Tue, Sep 19, 2023, 7:06 PM UTC

the_af wrote: post #86

PaulHoule wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I definitely count on stinging insects that live in holes in my house (or that make holes) to keep other stinging insects away. What I've been told is that opossums are much worse than foxes in the sense that a fox will usually eat a chicken or two to survive but opossums seem to freak out and will kill all the hens in a henhouse in one go. I've often wished I could talk with my cats but more than ever I wish I could…

I have to say that I find foxes beautiful. Then again, I'm not a farmer nor do I keep chickens. I'm a city boy.

Post by willmeyers » Tue, Sep 19, 2023, 7:16 PM UTC

the_af wrote: post #11

ketanmaheshwari wrote: post #4

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

What!? Everyone knows a glass of wine once a day is good for your heart, but also even a single glass a year is way too much and causes irreversible damage ;) The old adage applies: "everything nice is either illegal or bad for your health". Or both, I would add.

Post by dukeofdoom » Tue, Sep 19, 2023, 7:20 PM UTC

alwayslikethis wrote: post #92

dukeofdoom wrote: post #88

The few times I visited a hospital I met people there with complications from previous drugs. One with liver failure. Thanks to that experience no covid shot for me, plus I actually read the pfzier study the judge forced them to release. I now view drug companies on the level of Cartels in Mexico with politicians in their pockets.

> the pfzier study the judge forced them to release Can you send a link to it?

Post by crazygringo » Tue, Sep 19, 2023, 7:26 PM UTC

costigan wrote: post #80

somenameforme wrote: post #17

"For more than 150 trials, Carlisle got access to anonymized individual participant data (IPD). By studying the IPD spreadsheets, he judged that 44% of these trials contained at least some flawed data: impossible statistics, incorrect calculations or duplicated numbers or figures, for instance. And in 26% of the papers had problems that were so widespread that the trial was impossible to trust, he judged — either bec…

I think you misread the article slightly. The 26% of zombie papers are inside the 44% of papers that contained at least some flawed data. Look at the figure just below this quote where the blue bar, indicating papers he thought were ok, covers more than 50%.