• Welcome to Phoenix Rising!

    Created in 2008, Phoenix Rising is the largest and oldest forum dedicated to furthering the understanding of and finding treatments for complex chronic illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), fibromyalgia (FM), long COVID, postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), and allied diseases.

    To become a member, simply click the Register button at the top right.

The replication crisis in science has just begun. It will be big. (Blog)

Simon

Senior Member
Messages
3,789
Location
Monmouth, UK
The replication crisis in science has just begun. It will be big. | Fabius Maximus website
Poweful and fascinating stuff:

Summary: After a decade of slow growth beneath public view, the replication crisis in science begins breaking into public view. First psychology and biomedical studies, now spreading to many other fields — overturning what we were told is settled science, the foundations of our personal behavior and public policy. Here is an introduction to the conflict (there is pushback), with the usual links to detailed information at the end, and some tentative conclusions about effects on public’s trust of science. It’s early days yet, with the real action yet to begin.

Read the full blog
 

SilverbladeTE

Senior Member
Messages
3,043
Location
Somewhere near Glasgow, Scotland
Because science isn't "THE Scientific Method", it's a Human Cultural Endeavour while ch we hope is based using the Method
And thus becomes manipulation of information to the Public
AKA
Propaganda
Knowledge is power
Institutionalized Science is institutionalized corruption, like it or not, it's ine
Most researchers are honest but he who controls the Journals, the newspapers, the University grants, though tenure, the ego, will manipulate things to their beliefs
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,824
I wonder to what extent the failure to replicate may be down to poor experimental methodology, and to what extent it may be down to changes in the environment and context?

For example: the well-known French paradox, where French people have a lower incidence of coronary heart disease yet a diet quite high in saturated fats, which contradicts other studies that have found saturated fats promote heart disease.

Is this a failure of replication, or simply that in the environmental context and lifestyle of France, saturated fats do not lead to heart disease, whereas they do in other countries?
 

South

Senior Member
Messages
466
Location
Southeastern United States
saturated fats promote heart disease.
Actually, they might not, when you look at the actual studies.

The topic of saturated fat may be an example of misinterpreting a study decades ago and using that misinterpretation as propoganda to the public. The devil is in the details, and I fear government got on the "saturated fat is bad" bandwagon without proof.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/03/17/study-questions-fat-and-heart-disease-link/?_r=0

https://chriskresser.com/new-study-puts-final-nail-in-the-saturated-fat-causes-heart-disease-coffin/

@Hip
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,824
Actually, they might not, when you look at the actual studies.

Indeed, and in that famous seven countries study on saturated fats in the 1950s, it seems that Ancel Keys only chose countries whose data supported his hypothesis that saturated fats can cause heart disease, and left out countries that did not support the hypothesis.

The above article I linked to says Ancel Keys intentionally left out from his study:

Countries where people eat a lot of fat but have little heart disease, such as Holland and Norway.

Countries where fat consumption is low but the rate of heart disease is high, such as Chile.



But then this comes back to the point I was making earlier, that scientific results may depend on the environment and context they are obtained from.

And you have to question whether Keys actually did a bad thing, because if in a country like the US the data show that saturated fats are linked to heart disease, then surely you would want to highlight that. Maybe there is something in the American environment, diet or lifestyle that does cause saturated fats to increase the risk of heart disease; but in another environment such as in Norway, perhaps saturated fats do not increase this risk.

Perhaps what Keys should have done was to stipulate that his results are not universal, but only apply to certain countries or regions.



As an aside, I suspect a major factor in determining the prevalence of heart disease is the types of viruses in circulation in a given country: evidence for enterovirus infection of the heart has been found in 40% patients who died suddenly from heart attack.
 

bsw

w/r/t
Messages
45
CWuYKZ-WwAA35-I[1].jpg
 

Chrisb

Senior Member
Messages
1,051
I have not yet managed to proceed beyond wondering why the writer of the blog should see himself as "Cunctator". I do not volunteer to be a footsoldier in the equivalent of the Battle of Cannae before he is restored to office and prevails.

Perhaps the symbolism is that it requires major loss of life in a battle fought by lesser generals against weaker forces, before a victory can be obtained.
 

Bob

Senior Member
Messages
16,455
Location
England (south coast)
It's fascinating how so much of the blog is relevant to CFS research, and how it outlines almost identical occurrences and behaviours that we witness in the field of CFS, and how the blog discusses almost identical issues to our discussions about the biopyschosocial CFS research.
e.g...
The defenders of the status quo rarely actively defend anything. They aren’t about to publish articles explaining why NHST tells you everything you need to know, or arguing that effect sizes of r = .80 in studies with an N of 20 represent important and reliable breakthroughs, or least of all reporting data to show that major counter-intuitive findings are robustly replicable. Instead they will just continue to publish each others’ work in all the “best” places, hire each other into excellent jobs and, of course, give each other awards. This is what has happened every time before.
It makes me a bit crazy when psychologists say (or sometimes shout) that everything is fine, that critics of research practices are “witch hunting,” or that examining the degree to which our science is replicable is self-defeating.
 
Last edited:
Messages
3,263
Indeed, and in that famous seven countries study on saturated fats in the 1950s, it seems that Ancel Keys only chose countries whose data supported his hypothesis that saturated fats can cause heart disease, and left out countries that did not support the hypothesis.

The above article I linked to says Ancel Keys intentionally left out from his study:

Countries where people eat a lot of fat but have little heart disease, such as Holland and Norway.

Countries where fat consumption is low but the rate of heart disease is high, such as Chile.



But then this comes back to the point I was making earlier, that scientific results may depend on the environment and context they are obtained from.

And you have to question whether Keys actually did a bad thing, because if in a country like the US the data show that saturated fats are linked to heart disease, then surely you would want to highlight that. Maybe there is something in the American environment, diet or lifestyle that does cause saturated fats to increase the risk of heart disease; but in another environment such as in Norway, perhaps saturated fats do not increase this risk.

Perhaps what Keys should have done was to stipulate that his results are not universal, but only apply to certain countries or regions.



As an aside, I suspect a major factor in determining the prevalence of heart disease is the types of viruses in circulation in a given country: evidence for enterovirus infection of the heart has been found in 40% patients who died suddenly from heart attack.
Interesting stuff, @Hip. I was moved by your post to check this out more.

I often wonder if a lot of these things are artefacts of socioeconomic status. What if saturated fat consumption in the US is higher in lower scoioeconomic groups in the US- but not Norway? And maybe the effects in the US are not due to fat consumption per se, but some other factor otr factors that are linked to class? The studies always say they control for such factors, but how do you really know you have? All you can do is try to measure it as best you can and then include that in your model, but it might not fully factor it out.
 

JPV

ɹǝqɯǝɯ ɹoıuǝs
Messages
858
Every institution on the planet has been corrupted by the greed and financial interests of the sociopathic wealth addicts that are in control of everything. This will never change and will only get worse over time. Humans are a deeply flawed and degenerate species that will eventually destroy themselves.
 

A.B.

Senior Member
Messages
3,780
@JPV I think there is hope but I sadly admit that it may end like you are describing.

The instinct to survive, breed, and seek pleasure coupled with intelligence seems to have gotten so out of control that we may end up destroying ourselves.

The protestant revolution was in large part sparked by the population being able to read the bible in their own language, and being free to interpret it without the help of an intermediary.

We need something similar with science. Is the internet the modern equivalent of the printing press? Probably not, but a vital component. One piece is still missing.
 
Last edited:

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,824
What if saturated fat consumption in the US is higher in lower scoioeconomic groups in the US- but not Norway? And maybe the effects in the US are not due to fat consumption per se, but some other factor otr factors that are linked to class?

That's an interesting idea.


Have you come across the Roseto Effect? In the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania, there was a very low incidence of heart disease, even though the Italian community there tended to smoke heavily and cooked with lard (since they could not obtain olive oil when they moved to the US). Researchers put this heart health down to lifestyle factors: very close-knit community and lots of community support acting to insulate people from the stresses of the world.
 
Last edited:

*GG*

senior member
Messages
6,389
Location
Concord, NH
Interesting stuff, @Hip. I was moved by your post to check this out more.

I often wonder if a lot of these things are artefacts of socioeconomic status. What if saturated fat consumption in the US is higher in lower scoioeconomic groups in the US- but not Norway? And maybe the effects in the US are not due to fat consumption per se, but some other factor otr factors that are linked to class? The studies always say they control for such factors, but how do you really know you have? All you can do is try to measure it as best you can and then include that in your model, but it might not fully factor it out.

Or maybe it is more simple and when they took lots of Fats out of products, they replaced it with Sugar. Which is only good for near term energy, and goes to Fat if not used up! Probably why the Obesity "epidemic" has only gotten worse because of our "smart" Gov't agencies pushing the crap science!

GG
 
Messages
3,263
That's an interesting idea.


Have you come across the Roseto Effect? In the town of Roseto, Pennsylvania, there was a very low incidence of heart disease, even though the Italian community there tended to smoke heavily and cooked with lard (since they could not obtain olive oil when they moved to the US). Researchers put this heart health down to lifestyle factors: very close-knit community and lots of community support acting to insulate people from the stresses of the world.
And there it is, in the last sentence. The psychobabble shuffle. A move we've all come to know and love!

Thanks for pointing this out, @Hip.
 

Hip

Senior Member
Messages
17,824
@Woolie
I am not sure I would call it psychobabble in the case of heart disease, because the association of stress / social isolation with heart disease seems quite well established. Although as always, association does not imply causation.

In any case, I think a viral model might help explain the Roseto Effect, if we assume that in traditional religious Italian life there is less amorous and sexual promiscuity, and assume that amorous kissing is an effective route for spreading respiratory viruses.

Given that 40% of fatal heart attacks are linked to enterovirus infections (ref: 1), could it be that if you do not have much amorous promiscuity in your life, you lessen the chance of acquiring an infection through kissing that could cause a heart attack.

As the virus that triggered my ME/CFS (a suspected enterovirus) spread to friends and family, it triggered three heart attacks in previously healthy people. So I am well aware of how viruses can cause myocardial infarction.


That said, in the case of heart disease, I can well believe that stress and social isolation may play an exacerbating role.
 
Messages
3,263
The protestant revolution was in large part sparked by the population being able to read the bible in their own language, and being free to interpret it without the help of an intermediary.

We need something similar with science. Is the internet the modern equivalent of the printing press? Probably not, but a vital component. One piece is still missing.
I like this thought, @A.B. In some ways, the threat posed by the internet is similar to the printing press/translation of the bible into people's own language in the 15th century. The fears about it are much the same too - back then, clerics were worried about lay people getting their hands on the bible because they were not "properly trained" to interpret it, Sounds a lot like the sorts of arguments today against patients getting involved in medical science.
 
Messages
3,263
@Hip. It may or may not be true. Its the "psychobabble shuffle" because if you don't understand something, you can always fall back on psychobabble explanations, because they're generally undisprovable. We have no way of measuring degree of "stress" in this community vs. others. No way of refuting the explanation. Not even any agreed definition of what stress is (whatever it is, there's no guarantee its always lower in tight-knit communities. There can be a lot of pressure there).