Monday, April 9, 2012

epidemiological studies and hypocrisy

The "big bloggers" need to clean up their acts.  Since the recent BS about red meat, i've started noticing that epidemiological studies are okay if they support your position, or something you'd like to believe....  WHAT??? 

Ladies and gentlemen, either these studies are good science or they're bad science -- but you can't swing both ways and retain respectable credibility!  I'm getting to the point that i automatically shake my head and walk away every time i see the phrases "linked to" or "associated with," when reading about some dietary, exercise or lifestyle principle.

If you want to wax philosophical, you could say that EVERYTHING is linked to everything else, because they're all aspects of being alive.  Letting the dog sleep on my bed is linked to puncture wounds on my feet.  Owning clocks is linked to arriving at the theatre on time.  Eating is linked to both being thin and being fat.  Please.

We may have to put up with poor scientific study results being extrapolated into human guidelines (like ideal mouse diets being proclaimed optimal for us omnivores), but do we have to hear about epidemiological studies BEFORE the hypotheses they generate are subjected to a controlled trial?

No comments:

Post a Comment