On Thu, 21 Feb 2002 08:21:22 -0600, "Fluffygirl" <[email protected]> wrote:
>You wanted to know why double blind studies were done, I told you, briefly,
>with an emphasis on the medical aspect since that's the frame of reference I
>As it happens, I have read a bit on double blind studies. And what I have
>read indicates that they are done to test the efficacy of a product and to
>see if the results are due to chance or if they are not. They try to
>eliminate bias so that they can come up with objective results, real data.
Closer, but you still missed. Chance results are mainly determined by the size of the study group and the strength of the effect being measured.
Blind studies mean the person getting the drug/treatment does not know if it is real or a placibo/sham. Double blind means the doctors who are evaluating the results don't know either. The reason is that humans have this remarkable ability to fool *themselves,* resulting in an unintended bias of the study results. The less human judgement is involved the less these kinds of controls are needed.
>Conflicting data is examined. When one study's conclusions do not match
>another, then, other studies are examined. If the majority of studies
>support whatever the particular premise is, then it's assumed that this
>premise is probably correct.
What you be confusing here is called meta studies where similar studies are combined to see if the results from smaller numbers of cases hold up in larger grouped studies.
>"P" value is a term they use regarding probability that the difference
>between groups is due to chance of some other irrelevant factor. The lesser
>the p value, the better the study.
>It is a research tool, most commonly used in the medical field.
Out of curiosity what do you think would be the result studies were carried out on the claims of scientology? For example, do you think that people who were subjected to the purif would show decreased concentrations of (for example) DDT in their fat?
PS, you can grade this pop quiz yourself.