The Four Horsemen (blog on scientific fraud, Feb 2020) James Heathers

[JohnTheJack]

Heathers is a data thug with @sTeamTraen

But when it comes to understanding scientific malfeasance, I think one bias that’s in the driving seat, tooting the horn and driving through the main thoroughfare of a local mall, is the the false consensus effect.

 

[glennthefrog]

why is it that study after study come finding anomalies in ME/CFS patients bodies but they're never reproduced?

 

[Mithriel]

No one funds anything. There have been important studies, such as the NIH research years ago, which looked at cardiac problems in ME. They were meant to be doing larger studies, then... nothing.

Also, people complain that they have had blood samples taken then hear nothing more about whatever study. It cannot be because the studies are null so they are not published as negative ME studies are a delight to some "experts"

Of course, only a conspiracy theorist would think it was because no one wants a biomedical marker for ME to be found

 

[DigitalDrifter]

why is it that study after study come finding anomalies in ME/CFS patients bodies but they're never reproduced?

I think the problem is large heterogeneity of samples, most studies use the overly broad CDC 1994 criteria or the even worse 1991 Oxford criteria. Researchers should focus on patients who suffer from an adverse reaction to exercise & exertion not idiopathic fatigue.

 

[Mithriel]

The confusion brought about by the invention of CFS has been devastating for ME research and has left patients to suffer alone for decades.

 

[Snow Leopard]

why is it that study after study come finding anomalies in ME/CFS patients bodies but they're never reproduced?

This is not at all unique to ME/CFS studies. The problem is small studies are subject to a wide range of biases and this is a common problem across medical science.

There are a handful of findings that have been replicated 5+ times however.

The Zealot reminds me of someone..

• 
  
  
  • They are under no obligation to be committed to a bad idea, in fact, they may be committed to an idea which has excellent general empirical support. In this case, people judging them to be mendacious or overbearing may forgive their methods because ‘their heart is in the right place’, see The Smiler.
  • Medium detectability, much easier when you’re a domain expert — you need to know where to look.
  • Not a fabricator. Dissimilar to Psychopath and Smiler in that respect, more similar to Grifter. Far more likely to torture data until it confesses. Due to their legendary commitment to an idea or premise, may themselves attract people who present them with fabricated opportunities to collaborate. Can be a lightning rod for the misconduct of others, as will accept bad arguments, bad papers, bad colleagues, et al. because they are ‘useful to the cause’.
  • Related: believes that quality of evidence is important… but deploys commitment to it strategically. Poor quality evidence in agreement is acceptable, but is known to be poor. Good quality evidence in contradiction is scrutinized intensely, which is necessary because it was produced by The Enemy.

 

[Snowdrop]

You're quoting the Zealot not the grifter. Unless I'm misunderstanding something about the way you're quoting . . .

 

[Snow Leopard]

You're quoting the Zealot not the grifter.

Yes! Fixed it now.