Interesting article...Thank you...

"Jennions, similarly, argues that the decline effect is largely a product of publication bias, or the tendency of scientists and scientific journals to prefer positive data over null results, which is what happens when no effect is found."

Alas, there is no such thing as objectivity, in any endeavor in which humans play a role.

still reading......thanks

Quoted Text

The test of replicability, as it’s known, is the foundation of modern research.

no one looks at the BT/GT connection when testing......

Interesting that in the field of psychotropic pharmacology you see this longitudinally in the treatment of a single given patient: The decline of effectiveness after a spectacularly successful initial result. This is so common now as to have become proverbial.

A friend is going through this with his own blood pressure meds: They "work", but only for a very short time. Likewise his daughter's neuro meds.

I do think that, with pharmaceuticals anyway, this has something to do with inadequate trials; Impatience to get the drug into the marketplace. Side effects kick in unexpectedly and may even cancel out the supposed benefits of the drugs.

Look at the statins. They lower cholesterol: Yeah. But cholesterol, it turns out, isn't all bad and is, for many, supercritical. They deplete CoQ10, so the patient with lowered cholesterol now has a dangerous arrhythmia.

Only TIME reveals these problems. I don't think we should see it as some "woo-woo" twilight zone blackhole-warp phenomenon, like a Bermuda Triangle. It's sheer commercial irresponsibility in many cases, which doesn't reflect badly on empiricism at all; rather it demands it.

My initial response anyway. $0.02.

I guess truth has a short shelflife...

Quoted from jayneeo

I guess truth has a short shelflife...

You mean you guess hastily patched together so-called truth?

I bet the rats on cocaine have different epigenetics!

we are the rats.. we try anything so long as we don't have to take responsibility for it.  Ask to eat right and the world as we know it might collaps.. to many rats.. one following the other ..  

Quoted Text

Alas, there is no such thing as objectivity, in any endeavor in which humans play a role.

So true, TJ!

Very interesting read.

interesting read. My head hurts though! heheh

Quoted Text

subtle omissions and unconscious misperceptions

Our beliefs are a form of blindness.

The thought bubbled up after reading this--- Mind your beliefs; they will shape your destiny.

I wonder about-- the influence of expectation on outcome, not just in the propensity for bias-- but in the actual influence of the the experiment outcomes. Often, we seem to get what we expect. When our expectations change, so do our outcomes. Frustration or fear of not producing something could have potential influence. There is something to be said for unbridled enthusiasm of a new endeavor-- "beginner's luck."

I like the idea of the unbiased plan, design, results database.

I also wonder on the rat experiment with the cocaine if there are geographical influences in location that affect physical outcomes. Not sure that much has been done in mainstream science with energy fields in the earth.  

The decline effect, well, hmmm. Interesting.

Me thinks it is in my best interest to hold the belief that my body and mind are getting more efficient and moving toward greater abundance of health, energy, and life. Whether the data supports that or not, making course adjustments is it's only purpose. The external serves the internal.?.

Dr. D, it seems to me that part of your gift as a physician is not only what you know on a conscious level, but what you know on a unconscious level about your patients psyche. Some of what you said or didn't say on my second visit helped me in some way. Entrainment, perhaps.  

But then again, maybe I just knew what I was looking for at that point.  
Either way, thank you.

Great read, thanks.

Quoted Text

My head hurts though!

that s cause you were fucosylating big time!!!
http://www.dadamo.com/B2blogs/blogs/index.php/2010/04/06/why-johnny-can-t-fucosylate?blog=24

I haven't read the whole thing yet (me wee pea brain also hurts), but my thought was that perhaps replicability appears to decline in relation to the expanding universe.    How can anything be static and replicatable for long in a universe that doesn't stay put?

It's not the results that matters, what you LEARN from the results does. Repeated experiments under better tightly controlled conditions can be compared to a control group and will sometimes give different results from the original.  

Apart from the final example from physics all the research mentioned was from the medical sciences.  You will note that there was not a single example of the decline effect in the physical sciences, which suggests that the lone experiment on gravity was thrown in for cover.  The initial claims for cold fusion did not suffer the decline effect - they could not be reproduced at all.  Clearly wishful thinking is alive and well in all the sciences, but the decline effect is a little complicated that that and a little more unevenly distributed.

They are trying to come to terms with the fact that the statistical model (which assumes a uni-modal i.e. normal distribution) is not sufficient to analyse the medical results.  The truth is that humans are not all built upon the same norms, which is why grouping people around blood type or Genotype works.  Bluntly, if the microscope is not used correctly, all the slides will be out of focus.  Here the microscope is the assumption of a single normal distribution for most medical facts - despite the evidence to the contrary!

Ask an allopathic researcher to use some model based on the assumption of polymorphism and they will not know where to start!  The allopaths are in danger of waking up to the insufficiency of their most trusted model.

Quoted from paul clucas

Apart from the final example from physics all the research mentioned was from the medical sciences.  You will note that there was not a single example of the decline effect in the physical sciences, which suggests that the lone experiment on gravity was thrown in for cover.  The initial claims for cold fusion did not suffer the decline effect - they could not be reproduced at all.  Clearly wishful thinking is alive and well in all the sciences, but the decline effect is a little complicated that that and a little more unevenly distributed.

They are trying to come to terms with the fact that the statistical model (which assumes a uni-modal i.e. normal distribution) is not sufficient to analyse the medical results.  The truth is that humans are not all built upon the same norms, which is why grouping people around blood type or Genotype works.  Bluntly, if the microscope is not used correctly, all the slides will be out of focus.  Here the microscope is the assumption of a single normal distribution for most medical facts - despite the evidence to the contrary!

Ask an allopathic researcher to use some model based on the assumption of polymorphism and they will not know where to start!  The allopaths are in danger of waking up to the insufficiency of their most trusted model.

Bravo, Paul. A man with a cogent Thinking function.
The fault indeed does not lie with the empiric method, but with faulty premises.
Dr. D'Adamo is the last person who can afford to ditch Scientific Method, which is what assures his own credibility in Medicine.  

I always like to hear that "the king is naked"

All tools work best for the purpose they were designed for and when properly used.

Tools often don't work well when misapplied or incorrectly used.

then there are the ingenious, using the wrong tools for a right cause and get away with it, just fine!!!

One of the more interesting points in the article is that the editors of the journals discriminate in which studies to publish.  If I understood correctly what the author was saying, early on there is a tendency to publish studies that support the original "breakthrough" study, to bolster the theory.  After the theory is accepted, the editors become more interested in articles that don't support the standing theory.

According to this idea, it isn't that the theory is losing it's truth, but rather that the truth isn't being reflected by the distribution of published journal articles.

Mind over matter

I have to come back and read the whole article – you’re going to make me late for my Pilates class.