A New Decade of ME Research: The 11th Invest in ME International ME Conference 2016
Mark Berry presents the first in a series of articles on the 11th Invest in ME International ME Conference in London ...
Discuss the article on the Forums.

'The Skills We All Need to Move Past “Anti-Science” and “Us”' ( Hilda Bastian)

Discussion in 'Other Health News and Research' started by Dolphin, Mar 31, 2016.

  1. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,635
    Likes:
    28,047
    barbc56 likes this.
  2. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,629
    Likes:
    4,956
    This looks very interesting. I haven't had a chance to follow all the links but certainly want to at a later date. I'm on a reading overload, atm.

    Is this the same person who did the cartoon on the history of the Andrew Wakefield debacle? I have it filed away somewhere but can't find it. It has a similar format but more writing.

    Thanks!
     
  3. Dolphin

    Dolphin Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,635
    Likes:
    28,047
    I don't know for certain but sounds like it could have been her
     
    barbc56 likes this.
  4. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,384
    Likes:
    34,631
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    Looks interesting. I have come to many of the same conclusions, which is why I support Evidence Based Practice, but not Evidence Based Medicine.

    My BSc courses claimed to teach critical thinking, but my own experience was this is rare and dogmatic thinking common. Science degrees do not always teach critical thinking, especially in a climate of increasing budget cuts and cost savings to higher education. I saw this particularly in tutorials run by advanced medical students. Now some of the lecturers, who were mostly researchers, seemed to have a good grasp of critical thinking. Its hard for me to judge how many did not though.

    Critical thinking is hard. It requires training and discipline. Its not just about intelligence.
     
    ahmo, aaron_c, barbc56 and 1 other person like this.
  5. aaron_c

    aaron_c Senior Member

    Messages:
    632
    Likes:
    983
    I feel like I am learning so much more about all aspects of critical thinking in science from the PACE fiasco.

    Soapbox warning.

    Although Hilda listed some problems that have solutions (open access research, enforcing rules on conflict of interest, further use of pubmed commons, separation of drug companies from their own product testing, et) I think some of the problems that create research bias are too human to for us to ever eliminate entirely, or even almost entirely. Unless we financially sanction bad research, bad researchers, and bad spin-doctors (think of the scientists hired by the fossil fuel industry to make global warming into a debate) I imagine money will continue to pollute any debate it wants to. And being from USA, where free speech is a constitutional right, I cannot think that presenting bad research in a good light should be illegal unless one can prove a motive to deceive. If we stifle expression, we stifle the emergence of the next paradigm. Science has almost never not been perverted for political or monetary gain (the exception, I would assume, would be when science was regarded as crazy). As long as money talks, we will continue to have public policy debates based on inaccurate or misleading studies.

    Can we make our systems better? Yes. Can we improve upon human nature? That is more or less up to each individual.

    I would actually like to see moderated debates between the two sides in some of these intellectual conflicts. Sort of like an unofficial court of law, where one would submit a paper as evidence, and then the other could dispute the validity of that evidence. Appeals to authority would of course be invalid. Perhaps then we could at least get all the cards on the table. As things stand right now, it is much more like two people yelling at each other from across the room--neither one responding to what the other had to say.
     
    barbc56 and Mel9 like this.
  6. alex3619

    alex3619 Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,384
    Likes:
    34,631
    Logan, Queensland, Australia
    It is commonly considered in academia that you can never remove all bias. Its not possible. Its about managing bias, recognizing bias, and designing methodologies to minimize bias.
     
    barbc56 and Mel9 like this.
  7. barbc56

    barbc56 Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,629
    Likes:
    4,956
    @aaron_c
    Thanks for that.

    It really is part of the human condition. That doesn't mean it's right or justified but it's critical to keep in mind to prevent biases as much as humanly possible.

    This especially stood out for me.

    .
     
    Simon, aaron_c and Mel9 like this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page