The scientific world is suffering because of the lies and biased news to news you can close the doors and sharing. However, another part is true he described how the information will be transmitted and scientific subjects taught how to control lies in favor of. Health Magazine described as scientific fact you need to be sure of the accuracy of the tales explored.
News of the missing, incorrect, biased, and even on the possibility of being made- Did you ever think ? Without questioning the accuracy of the acquired knowledge, writing or even wrong can cost people's lives. This information is based on people applying first aid, diagnosis and treatment is set. With the information obtained by analyzing scientific data should be questioned, he described Write Scientific ensure the accuracy of scientists warns about not sharing without. So how will you ensure it !
From physicians working in different fields have consulted on this issue.
Consultants engaged in medical informatics in the United States, working as a research assistant, Open Science writer and founder of the website named Dr. yalansavar.org. Isil Arıcan gave the following information on the subject :" Nowadays, the internet is an amazing source of information for us as well as superstition and the largest source of the spread of inaccurate information. Therefore, the scientific information that is passed he indeed scientific whether it can be quite difficult sometimes to understand. Real scientific superstition and pseudo - science of sensational news to separate myself from the Scientific American magazine writer and founder Michael Shermer of Skeptic magazine, which summarizes the" Fallacy Detection Kit" ( Baloney Detection Kit ) would suggest. Fallacies Detection Kit, when faced with any allegations of scientific news or reading the news consists of 10 questions that you should ask :
1 How reliable source of news ? : Miscellaneous writings, especially the so-called scientists, news and love to fill with data and claims. But other news sources / claims may be plausible to look for how news can give you a good idea about the seriousness.
2 of the claim has previously been found in other similar claims ? : Data hitting want to create sensational news or persons engaged in the so-called science is not accepted by the scientific community generally outlandish claims tend to consistently put forth.
3 Claims / news has been confirmedby other scientific resources ? : The current scientific claims, by definition, should be reproducible. Which has been said by a single person or team and other teams give the same results when repeated by the claims should always skeptical.
4 Claims / news mainstay of the world we live in. Is it compatible with ? : This is perhaps the best examples is detected at CERN, said last year" neutrinos going faster than light." When first put forward the claim to the entire scientific world was quite excited, but so was hesitant to accept. Because the observed phenomenon is said to Einstein's concept of relativity and the laws of physics as we know it was quite the opposite. We've seen over time, the data obtained in the experiments were actually consists of a device error, we know the laws of physics still holds true.
5 Any one, any claims made in an attempt to show what is wrong Has he been ? In scientific studies, can all fall into scientists' have a serious situation : confirmation bias. We believe, the things we want to find, try to find things that contradict our faith while we tend to ignore. This also applies to scientists conducting scientific research. Therefore, a study or otherwise claiming that after she made a subject of study in reaching a judgment on that issue in favor of and against the objectivity of the evaluation on behalf of all the work that is very important.
6 other scientific data supports the claim that the claimant argued m, orotherwise show? 100 works made in a matter of something you say if a single study says the exact opposite, it would be good to work a little skeptical.
We know the owners claim 7, using accepted scientific methods, or methods to support his claim would choose / distorts Do ? Scientific studies are the gold standard double-blind controlled trials. Because these types of experiments in which the subjects of the experiment can be found in the confirmation bias or the placebo effect are methods such cases against the most resistant. Similar studies conducted to test the claims, the more reliable the results of studies using more stringent controls will be necessary to always remember.
The owner of Claim 8, when making a new claimpresents data to support their opinion, or just scribble their opinion is the opposite ofthe data ? Scientific claims must be based on evidence. If you have a claim with data to support their claims, instead of opposing views within the energy itself uses to refute claims that the element should be an alarm for us. This typically occurs at the hands of their claim of the claimant is true that there is no data showing that, rather than the opposite of ideological claims data as a sign that the smear sites.
9 things that put forward by the complainant, the old and accepted explanation offers a more comprehensive explanation from me ? Through science we live every day, we're going to have a more comprehensive knowledge about the world. Each new scientific invention, the observed phenomena that have been replaced by the old theory must explain in a more comprehensive and better. In contrast, a good example of the anti- AIDS theory. May seem weird but still today is not due to the HIV, sex -specific way of life brought about claiming to have a physiological condition. This is a new hypothesis about people with AIDS are revealed. However, they could not support their hypotheses with data, such as the claim that suggests that they are not gay does not explain how the AIDS cap.
Claim 10 of the ideological perspective of the owner or the individual earnings of claims related to ? We all have certain ideologies and beliefs, getting rid of them is quite difficult. Therefore, publication of scientific papers published in peer- to take seriously is worth airport. The referee controls the work done, the person who abstracted from an ideological or financial ties to check whether a significant step.
Of course, this list can not say one hundred percent works. But here 's a news avoid the substances that have, can give us an idea about the reliability of the news.
Approach to Controversial Issues in Medicine
Controversial topics in medicine, a part of the scientific process. In particular, we do not know the answer to so many different issues the team is working on different hypotheses. Sağlayıp scientific process work to be done here each claimant as objectively evaluate the data and conclusions. But of course the thousands of scientists in different places and times they work on similar issues as a professional handle this situation impossible to follow someone who is not interested. Here comes into play the scientific method called meta-analysis. Meta -analysis method we belong to the same hypothesis on the subject of scientific research data recovered is based on the statistical analysis and presentation. Through meta-analysis, the conclusions reached by small groups to try to look at them one by one instead of all the research that jointly create a much larger group of subjects to look at and be able to examine the hypothesis that the true effect size. For example, to determine whether a drug effective as 20 100 different subjects, with the results of the study may be different from each other. Variations in physiology or even live and choice of subject during the study due to some randomness even give each other may have the opposite result. When a meta-analysis of these studies, however, do not work anymore deneklik 20, 2000 deneklik see a huge work and is much more able to evaluate the results of the drug. Engaged in this work in the world of science and the like Cochrane Colloboration have some unbiased organizations.
"If the thing is that everything good coming Nothing in fact probably does not sound good"
Here is another issue which is very important in the scientific world" controversial" but which the public like we should discuss issues that are touted to be. For example, today's scientific literature we look at vaccines uncleaned diseases to be protective and public health in terms of the indispensable they are in the scientific sense of consensus available, but the public pseudo- science and superstition activists under the influence, though in this respect a difference of opinion had the impression is created. A similar situation perception of homeopathy actually available for non- physiological effects. Here 's a huge responsibility falls to the media. When news of the use of reliable and scientific resources and issues important to the real experts consulted. Finally, the general methods claiming to treat everything so you need to take it seriously, too. Indeed," If a thing is probably the fact that everything sounds good is not good for anything."
" 5N1K event usually is not answered in Science News"
While scientific news reporter to reach the correct source of information and support from reliable sources the information they receive is very important. Otherwise they cause public misinformation. Another important issue that should be in the newsroom but for some reason we can not see at all in science news 5N1K event."What?"," Where?"," What time?","How","why","Who?" Questions can not be answered in general science news. In fact, I think they are a" Where ?" Questions necessary to add.
"Some Time News in the text," Scientists" Description suffices"
We see often, a journalist friend of a myth that has expired on the internet, an article from him by e-mail, news like to offer. Sometimes in the text of the news operation does not take place even if the name of the team," scientists" explanation suffices. Which scientists ? What research ? Research carried out for what ? What was found? Unclear. Even worse, sometimes the person named in the article actually is not even a scientist, only to fill in the name of the article to be placed.
Of course there is a problem with the attention-grabbing headline. Most scientific papers concern the content or information transfer without concern Posting on behalf of the ratings. This being the case, tell me what is in the text of many titles Trying to be remarkable. News title" coffee drinker couples sex life more colorful", or" sexier than rats who ate yogurt" with the content as long as no one is much interested. Sometimes, this news when you find and read the rest of the scientific work, what is actually the work done, nor the conclusions that have nothing to do with the content of the news can be seen.
" Any interesting phenomenon in the face of what he did, Scientists Not flounder"
Science, already trying to explain things that can not be solved the mystery method. Therefore, an interesting phenomenon in the face of any of the scientists do not stay stuck his stuff, unlike develop hypotheses that could explain this situation, working on finding a possible explanation. Therefore, things that surprised scientists, they are often a source of motivation, a new field of study.
These types of articles and news about the biggest problem in my opinion, science can not yet explain anything in the pseudo- science of the description is automatically canceled. Science can not yet explain things, just by the proponents of superstition are ascribed to supernatural events. And the strange side of this pseudo- scientific explanations, do not show any evidence they consider themselves explained the phenomenon. For example, many people are talking about chakra, chakras, but so far have not provided any data proving the existence.
" 200 Years Ago Diseases Us Inside Out Marifeti thought it was evil spirits"
As a scientific phenomenon"yet" is unexplained, does not mean that there can be no scientific explanation. Over the centuries, science can not explain something mysterious is the fact that many events and learned that there are concrete reasons. 200 years before the disease came into our house we were thinking that the ingenuity of evil spirits, but now numerous factors including disease-causing bacteria, viruses we know. Solar eclipse of the sun in the sky, monsters arise due to ingestion We thought, now entering of the Moon to Earth, caused by the sun that we know. As science progressed, we now understand that many find the answer to the phenomenon, these responses do not be surprised to find a way to stop, investigate unexplained events and wondering, why try to explain the scientific method."
"Cancer Treatment under the name of Many Different Diseases"
Japan RIKEN Brain Science Institute postdoctoral researcher and author Dr. Light Science magazine. Call Yalgin, said :"Scientific and described as baseless news is lying, which is not always easy to understand, but there are some tips. For example, in particular health news ' panacea ' or ' miraculous ' treatment recommendations need to be approached with caution. Medical science is increasingly difficult working on the treatment of diseases and their treatment in general for different patient groups recommend different treatments or treatment combinations. Collected under the name of many diseases such as cancer, the underlying causes and processes are not the same as treating them different from each other. In an article in the circumstances or on advertisement ' cancer treatment ', ie every cancer treatment affecting skeptical recommend him if you need to. This head to toe, everything that the proposed method for treating the more true.
My past research has referred to Kim ?
While reading a science news also need to ask: Does scored the title to the content of the news ? Or are you just content to attract readers but striking a heading thrown incompatible ? What is the source of the news ? Who said research done ? Researchers and universities, even better given the name of research publishedin the academic journal, or ' Swiss scientists ' m as stated in a cursory source ? Researchers comments on news of the expressions Does it keep each other ? News in itself consistent? Of course when evaluating them at least high school level physics, chemistry, biology and geography of knowledge and scientific reasoning ability I think you should. Scientifically, and can not be explained in a few paragraphs, but years of science, mathematics and the philosophy of education can be understood as a phenomenon I see.
" For years the public that smoking caused lung cancer did not understand"
Approach to controversial issues in medicine, by whom he discussed the issue depends. Naturally in every branch of science still has not given the answer, there are many questions of research and discussion time. Who was right in this debate, but recent data shows that time. But despite the consensus of scientists is controversial public fund still has issues in this case, the responsibility of these big media organizations. For example, for years the public that smoking caused lung cancer, did not understand, especially since thousands of U.S. media experts who share this opinion the opinions of scientists and physicians, a few people who objected to it was the same as that of themselves. So the public has now finished, though this is still under discussion. The same situation passive ( passive) smoking to lung cancer in adults also, to cause lung disease in children known by the public for a long time prevented that.
Such matters journalists associations in consultation with subject matter experts and expertise required to prepare and thoroughly believe that doing research publications.
"The main result of the study is much exaggerated, or even that deflected Frequently we see"
When scientific articles primarily scientific progress should not be overstated. The results of the original study that very exaggerated, or even often, we see that deflected. The reason for this concern seems to pull a stunning news reader. In this respect, the task falls to the scientists think. Scientific developments, particularly towards the society of their own research should precede be announced. In addition, when transferring a research reporter restrained examples, analogies, and should provide information of interest to readers of the reporter 're never short of interesting material.
Second, science news should be mentioned in the research process and methods. For example : The study sought to answer was the question? What assumptions have been established ? These questions, which were answered by scientific methods ? Results were interpreted How ? These results reveal a new question what is it? They described the assimilation of society, will contribute to the scientific method. In such a society more and more individuals will be able to distinguish what's not scientific. Therefore, though fewer in number than the preparation of content-rich science news, I find it more useful to society in the long term.
" Many mature in newspapers Purportedly Scientists surprised to know that there 's actually a reasonable explanation"
Scientific research is done to find naturally unknown. In a particularly challenging research scientists wonder comes from zeal for the most unknown. Thus, the" camel stunned scientists as' news is true even if they are not to be lamented by researchers, causes worry. Newspapers said that in many cases scientists surprised to know that there is actually a reasonable explanation. But it is not really known cause of a mature science that stimulated the curiosity of people and often comfortable thinking that they can get interesting results."
"In most cases at source by one of the groups as appropriate to their goals have changed, distorted or have a different review Happening"
Salk Institute lab post- doc working biologists Bilal Kerman, said :"Scientific he described were unfounded however that the news is a lie the relevant papers examine when necessary, for example, two of the contradiction between, if sources increasingly detailed as possible needed to be examined. In most cases, one of the groups in the source according to his purpose changed, distorted or have different interpretations happening. Articles before and after detailed review and looking at the publications have been released subject, one that made a mistake, you have to look if there is incomplete control. If you are one of them ever more research, observation and experimentation is needed.
Read the news as those mentioned comprehensive analysis is not possible in most cases until this responsibility falls to prepare news. Unfortunately, the science news media organizations in Turkey to prepare specialized reporters have either absent or very few. As such, the news can not be applied when preparing the necessary controls and inaccurate or incomplete reports are being prepared. The public right of access to news and bad consequences that can sometimes untested treatments to avoid affecting our people trained in the basic science of media organizations person also needed to add staff."
" Never in Medicine" Precise, Warranty, Yüzde100 Success And No Risk" No Place to words like"
Op. Dr.. Orhan settings, you said :"The scientific hoaxes of news events he described, but that was a lie primarily with the determination of the person speaking on this topic would be. Any one about to finish school at the beginning of the name by a doctor hasbelkader"Dr." Add hesitation in pronouncing on medical matters, and even in the state channel that cuts people are showing up. But unfortunately, when viewed by the public to understand medical terms and to what extent this is true of people convinced that what they say is not so easy. But never in medicine"absolute, guaranteed, risk-free yüzde100 success and words like" have no place. If someone is not telling the truth if these words are often pronounced.
Controversial topics in medicine accompanied by scientific data and publications that provide information you need to trust doctors. Personal experience is important, but also from a scientific point so far is not valuable. Scientific articles about this subject while experts in the fields themselves, scientifically proven information is taken from three or more scientists. For the text of news emerged one by one from all confirmation and news are available. Only in this way that news is reliable. But only one person is doing, not based on scientific sources, containing personal opinion is misleading news."
No comments:
Post a Comment