Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 54 of 54

Thread: Risk of Scoliosis Among 1st Degree Relatives

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Pooka1 View Post
    Even though the subject of AGW is way off topic, Balletmom is exactly right that the issue with these hacked emails is one of potential deception and that is very relevant to this thread.
    /
    /
    You will note the explanation of "tricks" and it is what I stated earlier... something is not a trick when the data are "hidden" in plain view and a full explanation is included. The way I use the word "trick" when graphing some data let's say would be alarming to lay folks when it is not deceptive at all. It's just scientists jargon.
    Yeah, yeah, yeah....the innocent "trick" was to "hide the decline" in certain temperatures. How convenient the "trick" was to make it look like the data was in line with what they are trying to promulgate and not the other way around.



    The veil comes off global warming

    Here's a baffling headline: Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out.

    Global warming appears to have stalled. Climatologists are puzzled as to why average global temperatures have stopped rising over the last 10 years. Some attribute the trend to a lack of sunspots, while others explain it through ocean currents.

    So why are they baffled? The question answers itself. Their predictive models are inadequate. Instead of simply admitting it, they are saying that nature doesn't play fair because the world is not conforming to their computer predictions.

    [M]eteorologist Mojib Latif of the Leibniz Institute of Marine Sciences in the northern German city of Kiel. Latif, one of Germany's best-known climatologists, says that the temperature curve has reached a plateau. "There can be no argument about that," he says. "We have to face that fact."

    Because climate science is a financial racket more than a scientific discipline (more about that in a moment) the wonder is not that the warming predictions were wrong, but that scientists like Latif are finally admitting that they basically don't know what they're doing. Fact is, they have been doing science hardly at all. They've been running computer programs that confirm their own biases, the main one of which is to publish papers that please politicians who are ever-thirsty for more power. Climate alarmism is the hottest thing going for statist ideology today across the globe and politicians reliably keep the gravy train running for scientists who buttress it.

    In fact, none of the modeling used to predict the end of the world as we know it accounts for:

    The effect of water vapor, which accounts for 95 percent of atmospheric temperature effects,
    The influence of clouds,
    The influence of cosmic radiation of cloud formation,
    An atmosphere that does in fact end in space - models mathematically assume the atmosphere extends to infinity,
    The effect of deep-ocean, cold water flows,
    The effect of sunspots,
    The intensity of sunlight.
    http://senseofevents.blogspot.com/20...ing.html#links
    Last edited by Ballet Mom; 11-22-2009 at 08:11 PM.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Dingo View Post

    In Dr. Moreau's sample 2 siblings out of approximately 20.5 had a spinal deformity. (2 / 20.5 - 9.8%) That's a far cry from the 62.5% found in the Japanese study mentioned above. How many cases of Scoliosis would Dr. Moreau need to have have missed to bring my analysis into line with the Japanese results? 11 missed cases. Instead of 2 cases in roughly 20, the number would have needed to be 13 cases in 20.
    Hi Dingo,

    I'm just wondering if the Japanese x-rayed all the relatives? If not, there is always the possibility that because Japanese people tend to be quite a bit thinner than westerners...at least the ones that stayed in Japan, they were able to detect more scoliosis than westerners can without the x-rays.

    My daughter is very thin and it's hard to see the scoliosis with a significant curve, it would be much harder to see those with scoliosis with a lot of weight on - unless there were significant rotation.

    I think that in any of these studies, unless they x-ray all the family members, they simply could be missing a significant number of unidentified scoliosis cases that may never be identified.

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    948

    missed cases

    BalletMom

    I'm fairly sure that in the case of Dr. Moreau's sample most (or all) siblings would have been checked. However it's always possible that they missed some cases. Even so it's not that they would have missed some cases, it's that they would have missed nearly EVERY case.

    Anything is possible but when Moreau's sample lines up with the Boston sample you have to bet that both guys did their job just about right.

    The Japanese study never mentions how they put their sample together. My guess is that it wasn't random which explains their off the chart concordance rates. Also it didn't look at relatives, only the twins.

    The Moreau sample (41 kids) and the Japanese sample (21 twin pairs) were about the same size. But the Boston sample which produced almost the same 1st degree risk numbers as Moreau's sample was enormous! It contained 207 kids and over 1,000 relatives. All of these people were x-rayed.

    All index patients and first degree relatives (parents and siblings) included in the survey were seen personally and roentgenograms were obtained. Second degree relatives (grandparents, uncles, and aunts) and third degree relatives (first cousins only) whenever possible were seen and examined. In the case of those living at a distance, diagnosis was made on the basis of the roentgenographic examination only. The total number of second degree relatives was 1,720. No information was obtained on 543 of them (350 were dead at the time of the survey and 193 could not be traced). Roentgenograms were obtained for the remaining 1,177 (that is, 86 per cent of those still living).
    roentgenogram means X-ray

    Obviously the Boston study is a lot better than my analysis. What I should say is that my analysis backs up the Boston study, not the other way around. Both produced numbers in a completely different orbit than the Japanese study which is the point I'm trying to get at.

    The next time somebody tells you that Scoliosis is 90% concordant among identical twins ask them where they heard that. If it comes back to this singular Japanese study that's not a strong sign.
    Last edited by Dingo; 11-22-2009 at 10:46 PM.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    8,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Ballet Mom View Post
    Well, that's the first I've heard that your comments about most research results being false was confined to medical research!
    Actually I think that article was only referring to the medical literature as there is no way the authors could possibly get their arms around much else in one lifetime. Nevertheless I think it does apply to the rest of science for other reasons. When you can't get an uncontrolled study published in another field obviously uncontrolled studies are NOT the reason most of those results are false.

    No, actually I was going for the old.....follow the money...


    i.e.:



    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1225801796426
    No the money thing is a red herring and you never see this mentioned by folks who know how monies are awarded in the case of merit-based science.
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    8,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Ballet Mom View Post
    Yeah, yeah, yeah....the innocent "trick" was to "hide the decline" in certain temperatures. How convenient the "trick" was to make it look like the data was in line with what they are trying to promulgate and not the other way around.
    See this topic almost can't be discussed because of the huge divide between scientist jargon and the general public. Take for example the word "theory." The lay public thinks this word means a guess. In fact in science "theory" is the most complete explanation that captures the most data. So when something is elevated to a theory like evolution by natural selection (evolution is also a fact so this might be confusing) it means there is a boatload of data that supports it, almost no unexplained data that undermines it, and virtually all scientists (all intellectually honest ones at least) accept it because of that.



    No the money thing is never advanced by people who understand this topic as far as I know.

    Consider the following:

    1. That is the money he and his colleagues got in grants over ~19 YEARS I assume. That would not be unusual but it's pretty good. (ETA: The salaries of these researchers are fixed. It doesn't go up as the grant money goes up. I assume you knew that, yes?)

    2. Federal NSF monies are awarded on the basis of merit via peer review, not political expedience. Now the call for proposals guides the research but those never fund specific conclusions, only specific fields of study. The research falls out whichever way it falls out.

    3. You can bet you bottom dollar several of those millions that researcher was awarded were awarded during the 8-year Bush administration, the SAME Bush administration which was publicly accused of suppressing results consistent with AGW. How does that square with your claim that politics determines Federal research funding?
    Last edited by Pooka1; 11-23-2009 at 07:06 AM.
    Sharon, mother of identical twin girls with scoliosis

    No island of sanity.

    Question: What do you call alternative medicine that works?
    Answer: Medicine


    "We are all African."

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    494
    I am as guilty (perhaps more so) as the next person in swinging posts off topic.

    I spent sometime this weekend trying to understand the issue of torso rotation therapy and, while doing so, realized the extent of the challenge that folks face while trying to follow a topic here on NSF.

    The topic of the recent release of internal emails from the top scientists involved in climate science is relevant to our discussions about scoliosis research and scientific integrity. I started a new thread in “Research” where perhaps we can continue the discussion.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    Thanks CD,

    I will respond to Sharon in your new thread.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Dingo View Post

    But the Boston sample which produced almost the same 1st degree risk numbers as Moreau's sample was enormous! It contained 207 kids and over 1,000 relatives. All of these people were x-rayed.

    Obviously the Boston study is a lot better than my analysis. What I should say is that my analysis backs up the Boston study, not the other way around. Both produced numbers in a completely different orbit than the Japanese study which is the point I'm trying to get at.

    Thanks Dingo. I'm very happy to hear that the Boston study x-rayed all these kids and even the relatives! Good for them, it makes it more likely that their results are valid.

    I am still interested in the Japanese study though. I wonder if the Japanese may actually have more noticeable scoliosis than those of western descent and that may account for some of the difference in rates? You yourself have brought up the idea that perhaps muscle mass helps prevent progression of scoliosis. Perhaps with the slimmer build of the Japanese, they could have more progression of scoliosis than those of the west, seeing as we have a large proportion of Germans and Swedes, etc...that tend to have more muscular builds. It's a thought anyway as to why there may be such a large difference in the studies.

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    948

    muscle mass

    BalletMom

    It's certainly possible that Japanese might have more curve progression because they half smaller frames on average than Europeans. I'm not saying I know anything about that but it's possible.

    Everything I read suggests that in general the more muscle the better.

    Oddly enough even before my son was diagnosed and I knew anything about Scoliosis I had a sense that it was a small person's disorder. I know that's a stereotype but you don't automatically think of The Terminator and Scoliosis together.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •