Science

No science isn’t the problem , the problem is people trying to use science as a political activism . Yea we heard ivermectin doesn’t work even from a dermatologist in the Woodlands TX . His paper made it all the war to medical journals till …..It was found out his stripper girlfriend wrote it . Listen closely now , not all 17,000 people you list died from Hydroxychloroquine ……No they died from other conditions . Just like the one million people they say that have died from the vaccine . They had other conditions

When you have Science , in. Bed with a political party they are political activists no longer scientists. …I will continue to believe my doctor …A doctor once told me , I don’t know what cures things , I know what has worked for me and other doctors. ………He is not an activist and never displays his politics like a scientist.

Sadly I think most of the people (including everyone who has commented before me) has no idea what this actually means.

Bad science being discovered and called out by good science. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

I never understood this logic from the meatbrains. Bad example of (job) is found - therefore the entire everything is corrupt. Since a bad example exists of absolutely everything, it would follow that everyone - everywhere - is corrupt.

Queue the "Yup" coming next....

Notice that this is a scientist (article calls him a "blogger") and not some rando on the internet. He's pointing out flaws in figures and data that most in here wouldn't have a hope in understanding. This isn't just some clown pulling conspiracy theories out of his ass and just yelling "it's all fake".

When you want to debunk or discredit someone or something, the burden is on YOU to demonstrate it. This guy did it, and good on him.

Science is not the problem. The problem is that some people who label themselves scientists are using the label and the privilege to defraud others. They are the criminals of the world of knowledge. Scientific fraud has been around for a long time. While science is generally self-correcting---new and extraordinary claims are immediately subject to verification in others' hands and labs--detecting fraud at the time of commission is much harder than it used to be. The problems that we face today in science and its communication include (but are not limited to): manipulation of images, use of AI to generate data and in fact whole reports, citation of others' work that may or may not exist or may say exactly the opposite of what is claimed. Current estimate is that about 2-3% of what gets published is fraudulent. It's eventually found...but in medicine, the stakes are high because data are used to make decisions about patient care. for example, the consequence of the hydroxychloroquine fraud in the early days of the COVID epidemic is now estimated to have cost around 17,000 lives. Science does better than most other areas in dealing with fraud because replication and verification is "baked in" to the idea of experiment...but some people will lie for personal gain as long as they can get away with it. Trust the science? Yes, but that includes necessary skepticism and demands for verification of new and especially unexpected findings.

Trust your gut before you trust their science.

Stupid people trust the science .If not you are just….. …racist

Trust the science

Ohh wait now lets add... where did the money come from for the research !

Nothing here folks.. sort of like our famous "food pyramid" shoved down all kids in school! Crap food!

Sheep being lead down the paths!

A prestigious cancer institute is correcting dozens of papers and retracting others after a blogger cried foul

nbcnews. com/science/rcna135521

Buried deep in the article is this gem. Scientists are also PEOPLE, who are subject to all the same flaws that other people have.

"The report said Tessier-Lavigne’s lab culture rewarded junior scientists whose work produced favorable results and marginalized those who did not, a dynamic that could have caused young scientists to manipulate results and chase favor.

Outside researchers said that type of culture is not uncommon at top institutions, where ambitious professors can lead sprawling laboratories with dozens of graduate students who are eager to please their superiors and who know publishing a splashy paper could rapidly advance their careers.

Some scientists have grown increasingly concerned that limited opportunities for young scientists and a problematic system for publishing scientific work has incentivized corner-cutting for careerism."