1. Get the Diabetes Forum App for your phone - available on iOS and Android.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the Diabetes Forum Survey 2020 »
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Diabetes Forum should not be used in an emergency and does not replace your healthcare professional relationship. Posts can be seen by the public.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Join the community »

There is no such thing as a scientific 'proof'

Discussion in 'Diabetes Soapbox - Have Your Say' started by Brunneria, Jul 26, 2019.

  1. mike@work

    [email protected] Type 1 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    256
    Likes Received:
    149
    Trophy Points:
    83
    And no proof needed! :)

    This was one of the best statements in a long time @Juicyj - short and friendly, but right on target. Not only are you worth my "winner", but also a thank you, for showing what is important here...

    Mike
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  2. Rachox

    Rachox Type 2 (in remission!) · Moderator
    Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,131
    Likes Received:
    12,294
    Trophy Points:
    298
    • Like Like x 4
    • Friendly Friendly x 3
  3. bulkbiker

    bulkbiker Type 2 · Master

    Messages:
    14,794
    Likes Received:
    10,667
    Trophy Points:
    298
    • Like Like x 2
    • Friendly Friendly x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. Juicyj

    Juicyj Type 1 · Moderator
    Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,676
    Likes Received:
    6,306
    Trophy Points:
    198
    I think @Brunneria should take the credit for opening this discussion, she get's my gold star :)
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  5. Bittern

    Bittern Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    119
    Likes Received:
    65
    Trophy Points:
    88
    When at university if I used phrases such as "it is evident that", "it can be shown" or worse the wrath of my professor would fall about my ears particularly if not referenced to an accredited study. Assertions of fact make for bad conclusions and are generally based on poor, often selective, data.

    Our current scientific models work up to a point and generally agree with the observed facts, but only to a point. It is why there is still research. As an example Newtons theories on gravity work for every day use on Earth but they are not perfect and have been added to by Einstein.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    #25 Bittern, Jul 26, 2019 at 11:34 AM
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019
  6. Brunneria

    Brunneria Other · Moderator
    Staff Member

    Messages:
    19,098
    Likes Received:
    33,116
    Trophy Points:
    298
    Aw, shucks, thank you Ma'am.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 4
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Rachox

    Rachox Type 2 (in remission!) · Moderator
    Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,131
    Likes Received:
    12,294
    Trophy Points:
    298
    61B71466-C471-40D4-A961-CB35F5C48E53.jpeg
    There you go one each ;)
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Funny Funny x 2
  8. Guzzler

    Guzzler Type 2 · Master

    Messages:
    10,582
    Likes Received:
    6,970
    Trophy Points:
    278
    My two pennorth.

    Science is a living breathing animal. One should not become entrenched in the 'now' because the 'now' will change.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Like Like x 1
  9. NicoleC1971

    NicoleC1971 Type 1 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,833
    Likes Received:
    1,225
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Great thread! My suggestion for the forum would be some information on interpreting scientific studies especially on the contentious topic of food (Denise Minger has a good chapter on the topic in her book Death by Food Pyramid).
    It seems to me that this topic illustrates how 'reason is a slave to the passions'.
    It i s interesting to see the different personalities on the forum and yes there is sometimes intolerance of doubt and a desire to be 'right' but more often a desire to understand, share our beliefs and learn from all our 'N of 1s' experiments confounded and biased though we inevitably are.
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  10. Fenn

    Fenn Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    482
    Likes Received:
    956
    Trophy Points:
    153
    In the interest of a non competitive forum I think Fenn should also receive a gold star. not only for turning up but also for recognising the enhancement of this thread by his non participation.
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. Brunneria

    Brunneria Other · Moderator
    Staff Member

    Messages:
    19,098
    Likes Received:
    33,116
    Trophy Points:
    298
    I think that everyone should get a gold star just for reading this thread, and then they should get sparkly glitter added to their star (using craft glue) if they can remember the thread even exists by tomorrow. :D
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Winner Winner x 3
  12. Rachox

    Rachox Type 2 (in remission!) · Moderator
    Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,131
    Likes Received:
    12,294
    Trophy Points:
    298
    88039574-CACD-4CDF-B685-25B5E87427A7.jpeg
    Your wish is my command. Here’s some I prepared earlier :happy:

    Edited for typo
     
    • Funny Funny x 6
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
    #32 Rachox, Jul 26, 2019 at 2:58 PM
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2019
  13. zand

    zand Type 2 · Expert

    Messages:
    9,168
    Likes Received:
    15,460
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Thanks for starting this thread. I won't forget it tomorrow, or for a long time after tomorrow.
     
    • Like Like x 6
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. therower

    therower Type 1 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,763
    Likes Received:
    4,776
    Trophy Points:
    198
    @Brunneria . This pains me immensely :) but I have to say I agree with your initial post.
    I would give you a top banana award but that may be a step too far.:) Besides there seems to be a lot of spangly stars floating around.
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Hug Hug x 1
  15. Mbaker

    Mbaker Type 2 (in remission!) · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,476
    Likes Received:
    8,427
    Trophy Points:
    178
    EDITED TO ADD VIDEO LINK AT THE BOTTOM OF WELL FORMULATED STUDIES (from around 10 to 23 mins). IT IS BREATHTAKING TO SEE SOME OF THE IGNORED EVIDENCE FROM 1976, NOTE THE TOP RIGHT REFERENCE AT 15 mins 21 seconds (THIS IS WHY SOME OF US THINK THERE IS A CONSPIRACY)

    Where to start with this, as for example science creates unbelievably tasty treats based on the bliss principal, is this processed food good for us? I would say only in moderation, which is almost impossible.

    A Typical Bad Study
    If you are determined to prove meat causes cancer then do the following:
    1. Start with mice of whom 80% die of cancer no matter what
    2. Extract an element of meat
    3. Give the mice an agent that speeds up cancer
    4. Over feed the mice the extract
    5. Turn cancer indicators on and off via the extract
    6. Claim this proves meat causes cancer
    Ignore all populations that eat meat mainly in a "cleaner" fashion, as if they don't exist and take in millions of believers. (by cleaner I mean minimally processed diet).

    I think science should start with "clean hands", and a willingness to accept you might be wrong. You are meant to start with a hypothesis and then do your best to disprove it, along with others. There really is no point in the sugar industry investigating the benefits or otherwise of sugar. Alternative is full independence is a must.

    I would say do not have multiple variables which could all be the cause of your hypothesis and then cherry pick what suits your case. Alternative is to measure real candidates who for example truly really eat what is of concern.

    Stop retesting old epidemiology studies with new algorithms (torturing data) to effectively. I believe this is too compromised. Alternative for example cancer in meat, ask the carnivores on this site, and elsewhere to test their cancer (and other bio markers), as well as first world tribes.

    Stop the ridiculous meta-analysis of bad datasets. Just because you averaged out 10 studies is completely meaningless if the 10 studies were junk in the first place. Alternative, don't do it.

    Never knowingly mislead. Alternative, do not make public anything that does not pass the hazard ratio (2), and if you are going to discuss only cite the absolute risk (relative should be banned for obvious reasons).

    Upfront ahead of the title declare all interests including financial backers.

    We distinguish between good and bad studies by not having obvious contradictory observational evidence, again using meat, explain the current longest lived being the highest meat consuming in Hong Kong. By having a massive risk differential such as with lung cancer and smoking. By being able to prove something closer to conclusively, such as high LDL vs CAC score.

    I am not a scientist but I have read enough to know the bare faced, let's call it what it is "lies" that some of these studies put out. I am excited for the day of reckoning.

    I can feel my answer becoming too long so will end here.

     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Like Like x 2
    #35 Mbaker, Jul 26, 2019 at 6:59 PM
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2019
  16. copilost

    copilost Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    83
    first lol because so yes
    but it's sooo cheap and I can phrase my question in a way i like or at least in a way my sponsor likes.....
     
    • Like Like x 4
    • Informative Informative x 1
  17. copilost

    copilost Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    83
    dear junior research scientist please investigate this data set to see if peanut butter is preventative against - well anything really - if you find a positive answer please publish, if you find a negative answer don't publish, if there is no evidence please publish a paper stating peanut butter does not cause - well anything. thank you from a very public spirited "just trying to help" purveyor of.......
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  18. copilost

    copilost Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    152
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Dear sponsor, I just wanted to say how delighted we are that you are funding our new and promising junior research scientist, such talent!

    Obviously a healthy research portfolio provides substance to us as an upcoming/established/elite academic institution.

    I myself, as an established authority on peanut butter, cannot be involved in speculative research of this nature but I'm always interested in the products as a source of legitimate future research. Looking forward to lunch on Tuesday……
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. Resurgam

    Resurgam Type 2 (in remission!) · Expert

    Messages:
    7,168
    Likes Received:
    4,495
    Trophy Points:
    198
    On the news today there is a report of a new drug to treat breast cancer - which is a pretty sneaky sort even for cancer.
    If women have a particular genetic make up, and if they have access to treatment then they are seeing good things happening, a growing number are still alive when the usual shake of the dice has not been a double six and an extra go - some are reportedly free of the cancer - it is not a proof as such, but it seems likely that it is, for some, going to remove the problem.
    This world is an uncertain place, but even when we do not have a rigorous proof, we do see trends which are encouraging from time to time,
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  20. pixie1

    pixie1 Type 2 · Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    232
    Likes Received:
    170
    Trophy Points:
    103
    The beauty of science is that it's fluid, it changes,, as understanding changes. What Is known now, won't be in the future. Otherwise the world would still be flat. The key essential ingredient are the Maverick's who question the science of today, against the mainstream thinkers. In science, just because 2+2=4 there maybe an element which has not been discovered, tackling something from a different angle, may provide the key. We know that Neathandral man did not suddendly disappear but absorbed, mixed in with modern man. There are always new discoveries.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  • Meet the Community

    Find support, connect with others, ask questions and share your experiences with people with diabetes, their carers and family.

    Did you know: 7 out of 10 people improve their understanding of diabetes within 6 months of being a Diabetes Forum member. Get the Diabetes Forum App and stay connected on iOS and Android

    Grab the app!
  • Tweet with us

  • Like us on Facebook