Read on Twitter
Friendly reminder: if you are focused more on the results of scientific research rather than the processes that led to those findings, you are treating science like a belief system rather than a way of understanding. A thread.
Any conclusion can find research to support it, but every study has strengths and limitations. If you focus on results rather than methods, you naturally give up critical thinking, fail to appreciate nuance, and end up treating science like religion.
Science is never black-and-white. When faced with certain outcomes, ask why such outcomes were observed. Treat it as one piece of the puzzle rather than the puzzle itself.
Example: I'm currently writing a paper on the effects of ketogenic diets for sports performance. Most studies find neutral or detrimental effects. Some find benefits. The important question here isn't what the outcomes were, but why the outcomes occurred.
Favorable outcomes: poor data reporting
Neutral outcomes: Recreational athletes and/or moderate-intensity exercise tests
Detrimental outcomes: Elite athletes and/or high-intensity exercise tests
By appreciating nuance, we can start to form a coherent picture of the research.
Neutral outcomes: Recreational athletes and/or moderate-intensity exercise tests
Detrimental outcomes: Elite athletes and/or high-intensity exercise tests
By appreciating nuance, we can start to form a coherent picture of the research.
Elite athletes have no room for error and compete at ridiculously high intensities. The biochemical changes induced by ketogenic diets impair their performance accordingly. Recreational athletes can't push themselves as hard, so have more leeway in their dietary choices.
Another example is vitamin D. Many null results involve people who were not deficient. This simply nuance often goes unappreciated. While not always the case, it's logical to believe that sufficient and deficient folks will experience different outcomes from supplementation.
Too many people today fling around studies as if they are in a PubMed battle royal. Stop. I know that seeing people mislead others using research is frustrating, but don't stoop to their level by shoving other conclusions in their face. Instead, appreciate the nuance, the process
Remember, science is a tool that helps us understand the world. Science is not a religion. Science is not a weapon to use against people who don’t agree with you. As Feynman once said, “I’d rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned.”
