Prior Bias and the False-Positive problem in the news at Forbes

Geoffrey Kabat at Forbes:

...Epidemiologists have long been aware of the baleful effects of contradictory findings reported in the media, which confuse the public about what threats to health are worth worrying about. However, only recently have prominent epidemiologists begun to critically examine their own discipline and to speak out about the “false positives” – initial findings that later prove to be wrong – that are latched onto by the media, the public, advocacy groups, and regulatory agencies.

In 2005 the epidemiologist John Ioannidis published a paper entitled “Why Most Research Findings are False.” Among the factors contributing to this reality, he cited methodological issues but also researchers’ desire for their results to be meaningful and the strong motivation of professional advancement.

In the past several years, one of the most respected institutions in the area of disease prevention has come under scrutiny for allowing its assessments to be colored by a bias toward positive results and to be swayed by advocacy in the wider society...

@ How Activism Distorts The Assessment Of Health Risks - Forbes:

And a reader at Google Plus adds this


How Drug Company Money Is Undermining Science
The pharmaceutical industry funnels money to prominent scientists who are doing research that affects its products--and nobody can stop it


See also

GMO Statistics Part 32. Scientific discoveries about implausible guesses are very like to be false