Results for: publication bias
CAM and Evidenced-Based Medicine
Mark Tonelli, MD has problems with evidence-based medicine (EBM). He has published a few articles detailing his issues, and he makes some legitimate points. We at science-based medicine (SBM) have a few issues with the execution of EBM as well, so I am sympathetic to constructive criticism. In an article titled: Integrating evidence into clinical practice: an alternative to evidence-based approaches. The...
Ann Coulter says: Radiation is good for you!
In her eagerness to convince everyone that radiation leakage from the Fukushima reactor damaged by the recent tsunami poses no threat, Ann Coulter turns the concept of hormesis on its head and tries to argue that a little extra ionizing radiation is good for you. Ann Coulter being Ann Coulter, she has no clue what she is talking about, but can spin...
Skepticism versus nihilism about cancer and science-based medicine
Last Friday, Mark Crislip posted an excellent deconstruction of a very disappointing article that appeared in the most recent issue of Skeptical Inquirer, the flagship publication of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI). I say “disappointing,” because I was disappointed to see SI (Skeptical Inquirer, not Sports Illustrated) publish such a biased, poorly thought out article, apparently for the sake of controversy....
Deadly Indeed
There are sources of information I inclined to accept with minimal questioning. I do not have time to examine everything in excruciating detail, and like most people, use intellectual short cuts to get through the day. If it comes from Clinical Infectious Diseases or the NEJM, I am inclined to accept the conclusions without a great deal of analysis, especially for non-infectious...
Ear Infections: To Treat or Not to Treat
Acute otitis media, also known as an ear infection, is a common problem that used to be treated routinely with antibiotics. As more evidence accumulated, it became clear that the practice needed to change. Seven years after the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians released their guidelines, what has changed?
“Piltdown medicine” and Andrew Wakefield’s MMR vaccine fraud
Pity poor Andrew Wakefield. Well, not really. I tend to view what’s happening to him yet again as the chickens coming home to roost. Let’s put it this way. 2010 was a terrible year for him, and 2011 is starting out almost as bad. In February 2010, the General Medical Council in the U.K. recommended that Wakefield be stripped of his license...
Cell Phones and Behavior
Cell phones continue to be a focus of epidemiological studies and public concern, despite the fact that so far there is no compelling evidence of any health risk from cell phones. Concerns are likely to be sparked anew with the report of a study linking cell phone use to behavioral problems in children. The study, by Divan, Kheifets, Obel, and Olsen, is...
Of SBM and EBM Redux. Part I: Does EBM Undervalue Basic Science and Overvalue RCTs?
During the most recent kerfuffle about whether or not Evidence-Based Medicine can legitimately claim to be science-based medicine, it became clear to me that a whole, new round of discussion and documentation is necessary. This is frustrating because I’ve already done it several times, most recently less than a year ago. Moreover, I’ve provided a table of links to the whole series...
The final nail in the mercury-autism hypothesis?
Another study. Another failure to link thimerosal to a higher risk of autism. Can we just bury the claim that thimerosal in vaccines causes autism, already?
Peer Review and the Internet
Peer-review has been the cornerstone of quality control in academia, including science and medicine, for the past century. The process is slow and laborious, but a necessary filter in order to maintain a certain standard within the literature. Yet more and more scholars are recognizing the speed, immediacy, and openness of the internet as a tool for exchanging ideas and information, and...