Posted on 02/09/2011 6:28:23 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion
You have a source for that? the last info that I've seen says otherwise.
The phrase "medical research" inludes both preclinical research AND clinical trials.
Most clinical trials are paid for by private companies, and thus I believe, by a narrow margin, a majority of all medical research is paid for by private companies.
Even when a claim is disproved, it hangs around like a deadbeat renter you can’t evict. Years after the claim that vitamin E prevents heart disease had been overturned, half the scientific papers mentioning it cast it as true, Ioannidis found in 2007.
Reminds me of Glowbal Warming
“The use of statistics is when this all started going worng”
As opposed to what? Stats work for me if used correctly.. As an MBA student I used stats to project marketing, sales, and outcome. Do you rely on gut reaction like these libs??
It’s a Newsweak/DailyBeast article, automatically assumed to be untrue, though perhaps containing a truthful statement here or there, but the parts I checked out were definitely out and out lies.
This article should have been titled: “Everything About Medicine in This Article is Wrong”.
Statins are bad news all around, but I read the abstract of the Cochrane Collaboration article that was mentioned, and I quote its conclusion:
“Although reductions in all-cause mortality, composite endpoints and revascularisations were found with no excess of adverse events, there was evidence of selective reporting of outcomes, failure to report adverse events and inclusion of people with cardiovascular disease. Only limited evidence showed that primary prevention with statins may be cost effective and improve patient quality of life. Caution should be taken in prescribing statins for primary prevention among people at low cardiovascular risk.”
This is not even close to Begley’s claim that the report states that “there’s no good evidence that statins (drugs like Lipitor and Crestor) help people with no history of heart disease.”
Likewise, I read the IOM’s “Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium and Vitamin D”. There’s not one mention in the report as Begley claims that the “Institute of Medicine concluded that having a blood test for vitamin D is pointless: almost everyone has enough D for bone health”
The report actually concludes:
“Scientific evidence indicates that calcium and vitamin
D play key roles in bone health. The current evidence, however, does not support other benefits for vitamin D or calcium intake. More targeted research should continue. Higher levels have not been shown to confer greater benefits, and in fact, they have been linked to other health problems, challenging the concept that “more is better.”
I suppose Newsweak/DailyBeast is simply spewing forth false medical propaganda to help the neo-Marxists start denying people health care under the guise that “Almost Everything You Hear About Medicine Is Wrong”, and therefore what the neo-Marxists will be saying must be right.
Science has been contaminated with politics.
This was brought home to me a long time ago.
See, it was an article in ScienceNews about if cutting boards of wood were really that bad compared to plastic cutting boards. Because the researcher found that there had been NO STUDY DONE BEFORE the gov decided that restaurants should ONLY use plastic.
I mean really, no study had been done BEFORE THE WHOLE NATION WAS FORCED TO USE PLASTIC BOARDS.
Guess what he found? That wood was actually BETTER AND SAFER. Wood even had anitmicrobial properties. This was back in 2000.
I will NEVER forget that all kinds of recommendations can come out and there will be NO science behind it, more often than you will EVER be told.
Garbage in garbage out they say.
I learned statistics doing it by hand when you understood the number. Now days you put it in the computer and you get a number but you don't know what it means, but it is a number and by God, we better worship that number.
Do you rely on gut reaction like these libs??
ping
Its about time that this is being made known.
Medicine has sold out to the bottom line. Cures for every degenerative disease have been known for millenia, and are disregarded in favor of kills that make big pharma and big med rich.
Enough!
>> “Please be advised that “sharon begley” has no scientific training nor medical credential whatsoever.” <<
.
Then I guess she doesn’t have a license to kill for dollars.
.
>> “My understanding is that this woman is a reporterette. Like most of the media” <<
.
And when you cannot demolish the facts, just attack the reporter.
This thread is loaded up with adhominem against the messenger, but not a shred of factual refutation.
>> “What a convenient article! We could save gazillions by having bureaucrats rationally and intelligently decide which tests and pills are useful and which are not. And you thought ObamaCare would not save money.” <<
.
Or we could simply recognize that pills cannot and do not cure anything, but make hundreds of billions of dollars for those that use those pills to kill.
>> “How can you possibly doubt that assertion?” <<
.
Because you’re an idiot popingjay, ok?
I agree with you entirely.
First we kill the messinger....
Your critical eye seems to have missed that Begley didn't make any of the claims in the article except perhaps the following.
Of course, not all conventional health wisdom is wrong. Smoking kills, being morbidly obese or severely underweight makes you more likely to die before your time, processed meat raises the risk of some cancers, and controlling blood pressure reduces the risk of stroke.
Those claims are rather specious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.