All please read! Once and For All: "Scientific Evidence"

[buffdoc]

Buffdoc, excellent post, I couldn't agree more. I usually take what the medical powers-that-be say with a grain of salt. In fact when ever I see the result of 'a new study' I immediately question what their motives are. I believe the pharmaceutical industry is behind 99.99% of the corruption and misinformation. It's sure refreshing -- and shocking to be honest -- to see an MD willing to admit these things. Thanks for the post.

Yeah, an excellent example reported in the lay press recently (2-3 wks ago) was a new study which says that perhaps the COX-2 inhibitors (Celebrex, Vioxx, etc.) are NOT as GI tract friendly as the previous studies had purported (this "fact" was the major marketing rationale behind their release!) So what do we believe? There is an inherent conflict of interest in some (a lot?) of the pharmaceutical research that goes on today.
Take it w/ a grain of salt, bro's.

 

[buffdoc]

Good point Doc! We all know the double-blind placebo controlled studies are the gold standards when it comes to research. But that is all they are, just research studies. It is ultimately left for the end user (reader) to decide what to do with that information. Many things need to be considered when evaluating studies as well. Just because the authors conclude their study to be "correct" doesn't necessarily mean it applies to all subsets of people. Like stated before, real world experience and first hand experience is also key. Something to note is that when a drug is going through its phases of research it may seem a cure all, but the real truth isn't told until it is distributed to the masses and postmarketing studies are conducted. So that is why I tell people not to just to skip to the conclusion of the research article, but to read the whole thing and think about how this may apply to different settings. Clinical research studies are an invaluable tool, but need to be evaluated cautiously. And sometimes this can be rather hard to do.

Well put. And yes, it's REAL hard to eval these things, even if you're a basic science person or a research MD, which I'm not. Also, being published is not the same as having the truth. It's not that unusual for a study to be published in JAMA or New England Journal of Medicine, and then when someone reviews the raw data, the whole paper and its conclusions are erroneous. Then the embarassed editors have to decide: admit it and lose credibility, or sweep it under the rug. Guess what often happens? Lots of good work out there, and lots of dirty little secrets. Too bad, but, as they say, "follow the money".

 

[ichabodcrane]

^

 

[bigdelt69]

This thread makes several good points. Lets not forget the main point of the thread.

When debating over opinions dont start the "Show me the study" bullshit as to make yourself appear to be more intelligent. Many truthful opinions are stated on the board everyday. Not all of them can be backed up with a study.

Also remember that we discuss anabolic steroids, much of the stuff that we do may never be put to test.