Replies to: It's not just psychology papers
Excellent stuff. It's an even big problem in this age of politicization.....
....researchers go into their studies "unblinded" in the sense that they already know the politically rewarded outcome to the study. (As an example, we saw this in medicine during COVID. The acceptance of less rigorous and flawed study designs in the medical field was shocking - even more so when those who pointed it out were blatantly ignored, or worse, ostracized and silenced.)
The mis/dis information peddled by anti-science sources was rampant during COVID...Baron didn't help
(no message)
Agree. Wipe your groceries, maintain six feet of distance, close the beaches, etc.
Wreck a generation by closing schools for eighteen months.
Shameful episode.
It was a truly novel and deadly virus without as yet a vaccine…ergo you err on the side of over
compensation…lessons learned…no apologies.
Closing beaches was very stupid. 6 feet made sense based on all other corona viruses.
We didn’t know how different Covid-19 was for months.
Not sure “wiping groceries” was ever a policy or recommendation. Certainly not here.
Also, the disease killed 1.25 million Americans and crippled millions more. But temporary restrictions on freedom were the real tragedy.
None of the things I mentioned were based on science.
Made up bullshit.
Also, the lack of curiosity about the cause of COVID is absolutely astounding to me. The left gaslit everyone who made the obvious connection to the fucking Wuhan lab. Called us racists. Typical
Even after 6 yrs you haven't learned a thing from the pandemic...amazing. As for the Wuhan Lab trope
it takes detailed scientific data/evidence to verify the origin of SARS-CoV-2...China totally wiped clean the Wuhan 'Wet Market' of animals and residues, which greatly hinders assessing the 'Zoonotic' origin pathway...and isn't about to share what was going on in their lab. The odds are we'll never know, which vexes the Infectious Disease professionals the world over...including the U.S....who desperately want to know the truth...whether you want to believe that or not...probably the latter, since data and evidence hasn't impressed you yet.
Iggle is right and I am right. Why do you continue to ignore the obvious?
(no message)
Only Evidence can prove an Hypothesis...No One has it...including you and Igglle...face facts.
(no message)
EVERYONE knows Ty.
Even you. You're just too pathetic to admit the obvious truth.
No one knows the origin of COVID-19...and certainly not any credentialed Virologists...their word
is the one that counts...not yours and those in your political bubble.
...here's an excerpt from the attached article...
-------------------
CONCLUSIONS DRAWN FROM EXISTING EVIDENCE
Scientific conclusions are based on likelihood given the scientific data, and conclusions can change as new data are obtained. Based on the scientific data collected in the last 3 years by virologists worldwide, hypotheses 1 and 2 are unlikely. Hypotheses 3 and 4 cannot be ruled out by existing evidence. Since hypotheses 1 and 2 support the lab leak theory and hypotheses 3 and 4 are consistent with a zoonotic origin, the lab leak- and zoonotic-origin explanations are not equally probable, and the available evidence favors the latter. Further insight into CoVs in animals at the animal-human interface requires additional surveillance of circulating virus sequences from animals. There is ample precedent for the seeding of pandemics and more geographically limited outbreaks from nonhuman species. Common-cold CoVs, SARS-CoV, Ebola virus, HIV, influenza A virus, mpox virus, and others all have zoonotic origins (31–33). SARS-CoV-2 is the ninth documented coronavirus to enter the human population. The best existing scientific evidence supports a direct zoonotic origin. As new evidence continues to emerge from scientific studies or other investigations, our understanding of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 will continue to evolve. Nevertheless, it is possible that its origin may never be known with certainty.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The COVID-19 pandemic brought tremendous suffering to humanity. It is reasonable to want to hold an individual(s) accountable, and it may be unsatisfying to attribute such calamities to natural causes. We understand the anger that people feel because of losing or being separated from loved ones, homeschooling their children, and having their lives upended. We have lived that experience as well. Science was our best ally during the pandemic, working to understand virus replication, spread, and disease to produce life-saving vaccines, antivirals, rapid tests, and treatments. Science is also a key ally in addressing origin hypotheses. Given the currently available evidence, the two plausible possibilities for the origin of SARS-CoV-2 are not equally likely. Continuing to frame them as such does us all a disservice, dilutes our efforts, and misdirects resources—only serving to weaken our ability to respond to future pandemics.
--------------------
Link: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10117112/
Robustness checks are now almost always included in Econ papers
Not saying that it isn’t a problem in econ, but the replication issue is much more problematic in psych.
Consent Management