Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sun, 28 Jan 2007 07:45:08 -0500 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Philip:
> > "Each time Barry Groves reports on a medical study he gave a
> > different conclusion to the data than the researchers do...." --Dr.
> > Joel
> > Fuhrman,
Chris Highcock:
> I thought that that was the point? Sometimes Groves may be making
> the point that the data does not necessarily support the conclusions
> that are being drawn from it. There is a whole separate
> debate about
> the inherent bias in much of modern peer reviewed science.
Groves wasn't making a point about the bias in science, he was claiming that
the Bang and Feldman studies said that Eskimos had high blood cholesterol
when in fact the studies found the opposite--that they had low blood
cholesterol. He didn't say anything about bias, he just misrepresented the
results of the studies. Whether it was intentional misrepresentation or not
I don't know for sure, but Fuhrman said that Groves has done this multiple
times, so it could have been intentional. Therefore the lesson is, any time
you see Grove cite a study, check out the study yourself. It's a good
practice to check a study when the author is saying something that seems
questionable in general anyway. I knew traditional Eskimos have low
cholesterol, so that tipped me off to check those studies.
|
|
|