Fat Science

Investigating the science of body weight regulation

  • Archives

  • Subscribe

  • Miriam’s Twitter Feed

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • ASDAH Facebook Badge

  • Copyright statement

    Copyright 2008-2010 by Miriam Gordon. All rights reserved.
  • Networked Blogs

  • My SciLink Profile

    View Miriam Gordon's SciLink Profile
  • Defenders of Wildlife

  • Miriam's del.icio.us Bookmarks

  • Please Support My Efforts

    Dear Reader, I will not accept any advertising on this site, in order to keep it free of any bias. I put a great deal of time and effort into making these posts accurate, readable, and interesting, and I welcome your comments. I would very much like to be able to make a living doing this, because the topic has very deep personal meaning for me. However, unfortunately, I haven't figured out yet how to do it. So, if you find what I write to be helpful to you, please consider donating whatever you can, so that I can continue this effort. Thank you so much.

Statistics, Semantics and Parity

Posted by Miriam Gordon on March 19, 2012

I am by no means a statistician, but I’ve worked as a medical writer and editor for long enough to know that the results of clinical trials rely heavily on statistics for their interpretation. There have been countless books written on this matter, and here’s a gem of an article in the Atlantic that sums it up nicely. But since most of us are not statisticians, we must rely on the “experts” to interpret them for us. The problem is that they can be so easily misused and misleading.

If you recall, there was a famous study by Christakis and Fowler (NEJM 2007) on the spread of obesity through social networks that relied on statistical analysis. In 2008, a refutation of this article was published by Cohen-Cole and Fletcher in the Journal of Health Economics. In fact, I would bet you a pack of bubble gum that for every statistical analysis ever published, a refutation of that analysis is subsequently published. So what are the non-statisticians to do?

I say we all need to learn to take most studies with a grain of salt, and approach them skeptically. This is something that children should be learning in school – it is essential to the scientific process. If this concept were something that all of us learned in school, we wouldn’t be so quick to jump on the published results of any study even if they would prove our dearly held beliefs.

NB: In their blog “Retraction Watch,” Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus have touched on the problems caused by faulty statistical analysis in climate change research. I hope to see more of this in the future. I attended a conference 2 days ago entitled “Bioethics Bootcamp,” sponsored by the Hastings Center, Science Writers in New York, and the National Association of Science Writers. Ivan, the Executive Director of Reuters Health, said that he routinely tells his reporters to “always carry a statistician in your back pocket.” Easier said than done, but I hope this will get easier in the future.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: