The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies

How to stay healthy and prevent risks and consequences on your health and public health. occupational disease, industrial risks (asbestos, air pollution, electromagnetic waves ...), company risk (workplace stress, overuse of drugs ...) and individual (tobacco, alcohol ...).
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by Christophe » 25/03/21, 16:54

ABC2019 wrote:Except of course to put false figures in your post, but it's called a fraud and


Well, yes...

ABC2019 wrote: It can happen in both cases.


Bin no ...

Take my zoo metaphor ...a zoo healer might make you believe that a lion is herbivorous if you've never seen a lion and you've never visited this zoo ... but no lion sighting in the wild could . Because in nature, there are too many independent observers!
0 x
ABC2019
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12927
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 1008

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by ABC2019 » 25/03/21, 16:57

Christophe wrote:Take my zoo metaphor ...a zoo healer might make you believe that a lion is herbivorous if you've never seen a lion and you've never visited this zoo ... but no lion sighting in the wild could : there are too many independent observers!


the number of observers is not everything, there are psychological biases common to all humanity: for example you will also find plenty of independent observers certifying you that wizards can really cast a spell on you from a distance ... : Twisted:
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)

Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by Christophe » 25/03/21, 17:29

ABC2019 wrote:there are psychological biases common to all of humanity


When we know that the venality and greed in the TOP5 of the biases ... It's not very difficult to use them for its ends ...

ABC2019 wrote:: for example you will also find plenty of independent observers certifying that wizards can really cast a spell on you from a distance ... : Twisted:


: Shock: : Shock: : Shock:

Full is how much (beers ...) ?

Yes you will find some but the majority of the other observers will say that it is bullshit ... so sorry I do not understand your example there!
1 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by Obamot » 25/03/21, 17:34

ABC2019 wrote:
Christophe wrote:
Bin if when they are pipeautées because partially organized !!


it is much less easy to pipeaut a randomized study than an observational study (contrary to what Guy seems to believe).
This is me where ABC1920 just admitted that we could “pipeaut” a randomized study :?:

Image Image

Did someone put a spell on him? : Mrgreen:
1 x
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14823
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4302

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 25/03/21, 17:50

ABC2019 wrote:the number of observers is not everything, there are psychological biases common to all humanity: for example you will also find plenty of independent observers certifying you that wizards can really cast a spell on you from a distance ... : Twisted:

Which they can indeed do. : Mrgreen:
0 x
User avatar
Exnihiloest
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5365
Registration: 21/04/15, 17:57
x 660

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by Exnihiloest » 25/03/21, 19:12

Of course we can do a randomized study, especially since it must be tempting, they are more expensive to carry out than the others. But it's at least as easy to pipeaut an observational study, and easier to screw up, because generally one will not be in control of the whole environment or of the method of acquiring the data (see the Lancet cases). .
What is pipeau is the argument, which is HS. If we compare these two types of studies, we must assume that they are honest. The interest of the observational is that it has a larger field than the other. We cannot test the effect of a harmful substance on health by injecting it into patients (unless we are called Mengele), while we can do an observational study on those who have been. accidentally victims.
0 x
ABC2019
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12927
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 1008

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by ABC2019 » 25/03/21, 19:33

Obamot wrote:
ABC2019 wrote:
Christophe wrote:
Bin if when they are pipeautées because partially organized !!


it is much less easy to pipeaut a randomized study than an observational study (contrary to what Guy seems to believe).
This is me where ABC1920 just admitted that we could “pipeaut” a randomized study :?:

Image Image

Did someone put a spell on him? : Mrgreen:


We can always defraud of course. But that does not prevent that if there is no fraud, the randomized study is superior.

If you suspect scientists, no study is superior, they are all dubious.
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)

Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
ABC2019
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12927
Registration: 29/12/19, 11:58
x 1008

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by ABC2019 » 25/03/21, 19:34

GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:
ABC2019 wrote:the number of observers is not everything, there are psychological biases common to all humanity: for example you will also find plenty of independent observers certifying you that wizards can really cast a spell on you from a distance ... : Twisted:

Which they can indeed do. : Mrgreen:

QED : Mrgreen:
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)

Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by Christophe » 25/03/21, 19:35

ABC2019 wrote:But that does not prevent that if there is no fraud, the randomized study is superior.


The observational study, that is to say the observation of the reality of the population, does not automatically include randomization ... by nature? : Shock: : Shock: : Shock:

How would randomization be superior? : Shock:
0 x
User avatar
GuyGadeboisTheBack
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 14823
Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
Location: 04
x 4302

Re: The fable of the superiority of randomized studies no longer holds up against the reality of observational studies




by GuyGadeboisTheBack » 25/03/21, 19:36

ABC2019 wrote:
GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:
ABC2019 wrote:the number of observers is not everything, there are psychological biases common to all humanity: for example you will also find plenty of independent observers certifying you that wizards can really cast a spell on you from a distance ... : Twisted:

Which they can indeed do. : Mrgreen:

QED : Mrgreen:

CQFD my c ... I said they can do it, not that it works ... with both feet in the trap (I will not say to what ...). : Mrgreen: <<< Didn't you see that? It was second degree. Image
0 x

Back to "Health and Prevention. Pollution, causes and effects of environmental risks "

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : Majestic-12 [Bot] and 287 guests