"Most scientific papers are probably wrong"

[Telos]

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7915

(Emphasis mine)

Most published scientific research papers are wrong, according to a new analysis. Assuming that the new paper is itself correct, problems with experimental and statistical methods mean that there is less than a 50% chance that the results of any randomly chosen scientific paper are true.

[Logic]

Aren't statistics 90% wrong?

[James S]

Aren't statistics 90% wrong?

Yes, and thats mostly because research has found that 67.5% of all statistics are made up on the spot.


The biggest thing that people need to be aware of when it comes to scientific research, is who's paying for it. That generally gives you some idea of how they end up with the results they do.

e.g. Research was conducted to determine if mobile phones actually produce cancer causing radiation. The final conclusion was that frequent use of mobile phones was actually safe.
Who funded this research?
Nokia.

[catmeow]

Interesting article.

Most researchers have personal bias.  Given that this bias exists, then consciously or otherwise it's as easy as taking sweets from a child to present only those results which appear to support your own personal point of view, and to ignore, discard or obfuscate results which oppose it, especially where money is involved.....

Of course Merc were able to show that Vioxx is safe, and made $billions.  Now we're not so sure...

It's amazing what you can do with numbers...

catmeow