Just one example, at the highest level:
Discussion
What does this tell me? Did the studies get replicated? That’s all I really care about. There are thousands of studies coming out all the time. Many will be shit. Should not be surprising.
The problem with peer review https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1420798/
This sounds like a fluff piece tbh.
We don’t point to studies and say “look, told you so”. We treat them as data points to inform decision making.
yes, do your own research. get your own lab if you can afford it, but few can.
It costs ~500k -1 million starters to set up a decent lab and that doesn't even begin to stack up the raw material costs.
great if you can afford to verify the papers, i'd like to see more independently funded labs do it. but most have foundations or universities that back them, and then all the politicking that comes into play.
Dropping links to one thing claiming wide disfunction doesn’t prove anything. It’s probably just one shitty opinion among the shit opinions drawn from stupid observations.
Not saying it is for sure but anyone can say anything. That piece you linked is full of probably
of course, that's making the assumption you think I don't really know anything about the research industry.
I’m not making any assumptions about you personally.
I would encourage you to lean about logical fallacies and then apply that lense to everything you read. Or just use existing tools that can highlight them for you. LLMs are great at this
There's a lot of shit, yep :D