Good article. The Cochrane Collaboration is mentioned as a body that provides independent oversight of medical research. This was true originally, however it's likely now that the once esteemed organisation has been conquered (by a former journalist) and is now run as controlled opposition:
That's the website of the co-founder, who got booted out. He
not only criticised the work of his research colleagues – a normal and desirable part of the research process - but also the pharmaceutical industry and established psychiatric practice – something not all dare to do.
A slim majority vote by board members outed him (over his criticism of a vaccine if I remember correctly - maybe HPV) - and his supporters on the board then resigned:
More recently the Cochrane Collaboration came out with a meta analysis in support of mask wearing - but careful study of the studies they chose showed the evidence for effectiveness of mask wearing among the general public was weak:
There are many kinds of research, not all is bad so do not throw it all out. However, all pharma research is contaminated by money. Medical research is often contaminated by the needs of big pharma. Now add to this the increasing levels of dishonesty and incompetence in science, due to morals of the times, and degradation of universities. I am personally aware of the effect of morals of foreign students from at least three countries, in universities, and would not trust many of them because of their shoddy results.
Once they move into industry they lower the level of trustworthiness of papers. And the honest ones are subject to censorship in the name of agendas. All in all, never trust data based on fraudulent statistics, which is too easy to manipulate. In clinical trials, 84% of serial killers drank milk, suggesting we should ban milk until we develop a vaccine against serial killing.
I was surprised Ioannidis kept his job at Stanford after he proved - years ago - that double-blind studies are essentially worthless. But then everyone just ignored him, so all's good.
Good article. The Cochrane Collaboration is mentioned as a body that provides independent oversight of medical research. This was true originally, however it's likely now that the once esteemed organisation has been conquered (by a former journalist) and is now run as controlled opposition:
Death of a whistleblower and Cochrane’s moral collapse
That's the website of the co-founder, who got booted out. He
A slim majority vote by board members outed him (over his criticism of a vaccine if I remember correctly - maybe HPV) - and his supporters on the board then resigned:
Mass resignation guts board of prestigious Cochrane Collaboration
More recently the Cochrane Collaboration came out with a meta analysis in support of mask wearing - but careful study of the studies they chose showed the evidence for effectiveness of mask wearing among the general public was weak:
https://dailysceptic.org/scientific-information-on-masks-against-covid-19/
Adding Peter G's letter about the Cochrane Collab, which he wrote upon being expelled:
https://www.ageofautism.com/2018/09/a-letter-from-peter-c-g%C3%B8tzsche-following-his-expulsion-from-nordic-cochrane-centre-the-chaos-within-.html
There are many kinds of research, not all is bad so do not throw it all out. However, all pharma research is contaminated by money. Medical research is often contaminated by the needs of big pharma. Now add to this the increasing levels of dishonesty and incompetence in science, due to morals of the times, and degradation of universities. I am personally aware of the effect of morals of foreign students from at least three countries, in universities, and would not trust many of them because of their shoddy results. Once they move into industry they lower the level of trustworthiness of papers. And the honest ones are subject to censorship in the name of agendas. All in all, never trust data based on fraudulent statistics, which is too easy to manipulate. In clinical trials, 84% of serial killers drank milk, suggesting we should ban milk until we develop a vaccine against serial killing.
I was surprised Ioannidis kept his job at Stanford after he proved - years ago - that double-blind studies are essentially worthless. But then everyone just ignored him, so all's good.
From the comments: https://hbr.org/1993/09/why-incentive-plans-cannot-work:Kih5jIaKFJmd3kbuQjdispnDcKE
tl;dr Conspiracy theorists = people with a basic understanding of human nature.