Search Results
7/19/2025, 2:17:36 AM
7/16/2025, 8:45:10 PM
>why is George in an overly large jar of pickles?
>I made a bet with him he couldnt last longer than 10 minutes in the thing
>how longs he been in there?
>5 days
>....dont think you should let him out?
>no way! he'll never shut up about it
>I made a bet with him he couldnt last longer than 10 minutes in the thing
>how longs he been in there?
>5 days
>....dont think you should let him out?
>no way! he'll never shut up about it
7/6/2025, 10:12:48 PM
>why is George in an overly large jar of pickles?
>I made a bet with him he couldnt last longer than 10 minutes in the thing
>how longs he been in there?
>5 days
>....dont think you should let him out?
>and let him claim the bet? no way!
>I made a bet with him he couldnt last longer than 10 minutes in the thing
>how longs he been in there?
>5 days
>....dont think you should let him out?
>and let him claim the bet? no way!
7/1/2025, 7:17:02 PM
>>16712520
medicine is notorious for having small, expensive, hard to control studies that are logistically and practically difficult to reproduce (e.g. longitudinal studies of like 20 people). moreover, from these studies, most conclusions are drawn from statistical methods, so p-hacking becomes an issue. that's because there is a huge incentive in medicine to turn research into lucrative products. everyone knows the medical industry is completely fucked with how expensive it is because of regulatory capture by insurance and pharma companies, and they want to ride the gravy train too. so, it's really a reproducibility issue coupled with a lot of money at stake which breeds the level of dishonesty present in medicine.
reproducibility is crucial in science. discoveries in most other fields of science can be tested and confirmed or refuted by other scientists far more easily than in medicine. when major developments are reported, people scramble to reproduce results or refute them (think of the high temp super conductor fraud that happened a couple years ago). you make a big name if you can poke holes in major developments, and your own research can benefit from major developments if they are legit, so people naturally try to replicate exciting findings.
grant money is at stake for any field of science, and people compete for that money, but that kind of money comes with strings attached to make sure that it is budgeted for the project and to support people, not to turn a profit. so most scientist doing research in labs don't have a lot of incentive to present fraudulent results, and their professional credibility would be torn to shreds if they did so and were called out.
personally, i do research because i like to understand things. i think most scientists feel the same way.
and i hate how medicine's foul stink is affecting how people view science and research in general.
medicine is notorious for having small, expensive, hard to control studies that are logistically and practically difficult to reproduce (e.g. longitudinal studies of like 20 people). moreover, from these studies, most conclusions are drawn from statistical methods, so p-hacking becomes an issue. that's because there is a huge incentive in medicine to turn research into lucrative products. everyone knows the medical industry is completely fucked with how expensive it is because of regulatory capture by insurance and pharma companies, and they want to ride the gravy train too. so, it's really a reproducibility issue coupled with a lot of money at stake which breeds the level of dishonesty present in medicine.
reproducibility is crucial in science. discoveries in most other fields of science can be tested and confirmed or refuted by other scientists far more easily than in medicine. when major developments are reported, people scramble to reproduce results or refute them (think of the high temp super conductor fraud that happened a couple years ago). you make a big name if you can poke holes in major developments, and your own research can benefit from major developments if they are legit, so people naturally try to replicate exciting findings.
grant money is at stake for any field of science, and people compete for that money, but that kind of money comes with strings attached to make sure that it is budgeted for the project and to support people, not to turn a profit. so most scientist doing research in labs don't have a lot of incentive to present fraudulent results, and their professional credibility would be torn to shreds if they did so and were called out.
personally, i do research because i like to understand things. i think most scientists feel the same way.
and i hate how medicine's foul stink is affecting how people view science and research in general.
Page 1