Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 71

Thread: Somewhat O/T - Scientific integrity and validity of research

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    I agree CD, sometimes a "conspiracy" really is a conspiracy.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by mamamax View Post
    Interesting article in yesterday's Guardian. Who is Professor Ernst Kattweizel, Where is the University of Redcar and what is the Temple of the Knights Carbonic (of which Prof Kattweizel is supposed to be the 21st Grand Warden ;-)

    I like to think my Internet search skills are at least good (compared to some expert level). So I went searching for the answers to the above questions.

    I believe the email is a complete hoax (or written in deep code). And suspect some others may be also.

    Sent a blank email to the Prof - to test the address, the result:

    A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
    recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

    ernst.kattweizel@redcar.ac.uk
    Unrouteable address

    The eternal question: Where does the sham begin - and where does it end.
    I believe that Monbiot was simply being facetious on the many different conspiracy theories that abound about a planned communist world government. He made that up. It was actually very funny and I thought it was very amusing. However, his most important statement was the first paragraph:

    It's no use pretending this isn't a major blow. The emails extracted by a hacker from the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia could scarcely be more damaging. I am now convinced that they are genuine, and I'm dismayed and deeply shaken by them.
    Unfortunately, you don't need to have the kind of conspiracy that he made up, to actually have an elite group of people trying to control people's every movements on the planet and make themselves exceedingly wealthy in the process while impoverishing the West. And that is exactly what has been happening, and I applaud the Bush administration for having tried to battle this conspiracy in the little way they were able to. I'm sure I was not the only person out there to think that using global warming to instigate a global government was propaganda in its finest form.

    The gates of hell shall not prevail...and all that....

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Ballet Mom View Post
    Mamamax,

    When you've lost Portland, Oregon, you've really lost it! Poor, poor, Al Gore.....not.

    Oh, and a late happy birthday to you!
    That is the truth - Portland Oregon was the original Green Machine and continues to lead the pack!

    Thanks for the BD wishes :-)

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned dad View Post
    The difference is; for bracing efficacy, there is no group blocking studies and research which present opposing views. If that sounds like a conspiracy, well, maybe it is.
    Well I'm not sure.

    Cases in point:

    A well respected research scientist, Martha Hawes, had her work rejected by a very prestigious journal (Spine). Why? Quite simply because those in charge of what gets published, did not agree with her. And yet her work proves the adult scioliosis subject can reduce curvature through non surgical methods. Her presentation was scientifically flawless yet her search for publication was most difficult.

    In regards to bracing - when we see a seriously flawed bracing study (Wong-Weiss & Spinecor) that winds up being used in making insurance benefit decisions, it looks like there is no control over such things (flawed studies) and that quite possibly, there should be.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Ballet Mom View Post
    Unfortunately, you don't need to have the kind of conspiracy that he made up, to actually have an elite group of people trying to control people's every movements on the planet and make themselves exceedingly wealthy in the process while impoverishing the West. And that is exactly what has been happening, and I applaud the Bush administration for having tried to battle this conspiracy in the little way they were able to. I'm sure I was not the only person out there to think that using global warming to instigate a global government was propaganda in its finest form.
    Agree with 99.9% of what you are saying here. Thing is ... In the article, there is no mention of the email being a hoax. As a result a lot of people are believing it - Michael Moore is all over it now too! Hey - how many others were fictitious?

    Speaking of Administrations, specifically government funding in the US for Scoliosis research - I cannot believe it does not exist and think it is high time something is done about it! My Quiet Riot


  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by mamamax View Post
    Agree with 99.9% of what you are saying here.
    Here's hoping that the 0.1% you disagree with relates to

    "using global warming to instigate a global government "

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by mamamax View Post
    when we see a seriously flawed bracing study (Wong-Weiss & Spinecor) that winds up being used in making insurance benefit decisions, it looks like there is no control over such things (flawed studies) and that quite possibly, there should be.
    Jsut so you know, my insurance is indeed Cigna, the company whose document I linked. They covered the Spinecor for my daughter.

    I dont know about Hawes. But I do know there is a big push in the US towards evidence based medicine. Perhaps part of the reason Scoliois Journal was created was to give a voice to those scientists whose papers were deemed inadequate (in terms of scientific rigor). Reading the papers there (as opposed to Spine) leads me to believe I may be correct.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned dad View Post
    Here's hoping that the 0.1% you disagree with relates to

    "using global warming to instigate a global government "
    hahaha ... nope (there could be evidence to support that theory) what I disagree with is way to political, and off topic to post!

    Lets just say I may as well be an Oregonian - hint: something about birds in bushes

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned dad View Post
    Jsut so you know, my insurance is indeed Cigna, the company whose document I linked. They covered the Spinecor for my daughter.

    I dont know about Hawes. But I do know there is a big push in the US towards evidence based medicine. Perhaps part of the reason Scoliois Journal was created was to give a voice to those scientists whose papers were deemed inadequate (in terms of scientific rigor). Reading the papers there (as opposed to Spine) leads me to believe I may be correct.
    Yes. Mine did as well, and I don't know if my company references the same study or not in their statements. My concern is future health benefits may be influenced by flawed studies. And I'm betting such is the case already - outside of bracing and in other areas, though I certainly have no proof of that at the moment.

    I do applaud SOSORT and the Scoliosis Journal - a giant step forward! You will find Hawes there. As for scientific rigor ... Spine stated (in writing to Hawes) that there was absolutely nothing wrong with her presentation, in other words - it passed the rigor test - there was nothing inadequate about it. She was told/dismissed (by the then Spine editor) who decided (either on his own or through committee decision) that her curvature reduction must have been the result of a tumor that spontaneously disappeared And that is why she is not published in Spine, because of one large ludicrous - opinion with absolutely no scientific validity in her case.

    I really do not believe that the Scoliosis Journal is a platform for inadequate studies. I do see some major differences among entities - One is headed by surgeons dedicated to surgery - and the other is headed by those dedicated to conservative methods.

    As you know (maybe), I am most distressed that there is no US funding through NIH for scoliosis research that would put both surgical and non surgical methods under one umbrella/agency.
    Last edited by mamamax; 11-25-2009 at 03:32 PM.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by mamamax View Post

    I do applaud SOSORT and the Scoliosis Journal - a giant step forward! You will find Hawes there.
    Yes, but consider what Lori DOlan said (I'm paraphrasing)
    " I commend thier dedication to conservative scoliosis management"
    " they have the chance to positively influence the science by doing some controlled studies"

    The subtext is "they may be on to something but their papers are largely anecdotal. "

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    9,173

    A conspiracy of epic proportions

    I think all of science is a huge conspiracy to make people more knowledgeable, sometimes against their will.
    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."

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by concerned dad View Post
    Yes, but consider what Lori DOlan said (I'm paraphrasing)
    " I commend thier dedication to conservative scoliosis management"
    " they have the chance to positively influence the science by doing some controlled studies"

    The subtext is "they may be on to something but their papers are largely anecdotal. "
    IF the "subtext" is a true reflection of Ms. Dolan's bottom line judgment ... I would disagree, and believe many others would as well.
    Last edited by mamamax; 11-25-2009 at 02:46 PM.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Pooka1 View Post
    I think all of science is a huge conspiracy to make people more knowledgeable, sometimes against their will.
    I like that - and likewise: Any huge (real or imagined) conspiracy is a lot of science designed to make people more knowledgeable against their better judgment
    Last edited by mamamax; 11-25-2009 at 03:13 PM.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    494
    Quote Originally Posted by mamamax View Post
    IF the "subtext" is a true reflection of Ms. Dolan's bottom line judgment ... I would disagree, and believe many others would as well.
    It is wrong of me to paraphrase. I like to do it sometimes though - especially when someone wordsmith's a statment.

    To be fair, this is what she said here.

    I have read a lot of the literature coming out of Europe concerning physical therapy and bracing. I commend the dedication of these clinicians to conservative treatment and I look forward to reading results of large-scale controlled trials from their institutions. We need as many people as possible working on this question in order to build a solid body of evidence.

    I have to say, I still think the subtext is there. Perhaps written more diplomatically than myself though.

    A similarly worded comment was made by the fellow who wrote the Axial Biotech paper in SOSORT. In the comments section of the paper he says something very similar (again though, very diplomatically - maybe we have something to learn from these folks).

    Mamamax, you might consider taking that link above to the scoliosis support discussion on braist and include it in your recent thread on braist.
    Last edited by concerned dad; 11-25-2009 at 03:39 PM.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Pooka1 View Post
    I think all of science is a huge conspiracy to make people more knowledgeable, sometimes against their will.
    Surely you remember Richard Feynman, Nobel prize winning physicist great?


    "Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceeding generation . . .As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts."

    Richard Feynman, Nobel-prize-winning physicist,
    in The Pleasure of Finding Things Out
    as quoted in American Scientist v. 87, p. 462 (1999).

    /
    /
    /
    These climate scientists, against their will, will surely make people more knowledgeable....

    Really, I have nothing against scientists in general....just the ones who are pursuing agendas and not pursuing true knowledge.

Posting Permissions

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