Tuesday, July 16, 2013

On French Fries and the methodology of science

This blog is just an introduction to one done by a brilliant science teacher, in clear language that even I can follow.

Studying  health is one of the passions of my life, so every now and then I try to decipher an article on PubMed. But when it comes to evaluating the study, I am sort of lost. My brain glazes over easily these days. It didn't always. I remember being spell-bound by "Microbe hunters" in my early teens.

I do know that the words "studies show" are completely meaningless without knowing who did the study, how was it designed, etc. 

Dr. Jon Barron did an excellent (IMHO) article taking apart the study that claimed to prove Echinacea was worthless. I was going to look that up, but it is summer, and we are trying to have a life here.

Meanwhile, if you are interested in why methodology is one of the first things to pay attention to, read this. If the beginning is a bit daunting, scroll to the case history. It is hilarious. I especially like the input of (Caveman et al.)


PS The author is my daughter.

1 comment:

troutbirder said...

Mmmm. That's a friend of mine. Mr. Science who always says "studies show." Skeptic by nature I've given up questioning him cause he takes offense....:)