Comments by "Flook D" (@flookd5516) on "Is Science Dying?" video.

  1. Individual research papers are very narrow in scope; most apparent contradictions come down to significant differences in what is actually being looked. Sometimes it is a matter of somebody disproving a prevailing hypothesis; there’s no easy way to jump that far ahead. Yes, the system could do with a revision of funding & publishing but it’s not a simple matter.
    1
  2. Sex & gender are two different things; sex is the biological, gender the psychological/sociological.
    1
  3. You’re conflating a number of different issues. The example you refer to was from the NEJM and probably occurring through all high prestige journals. There was a significant proportion of papers submitted & published where companies were essentially masquerading their work as having been conducted by outside, unrelated researchers. There was no way to pick a paper and say with any certainty that it eas independent. More generally the problems are due to pressure to publish frequently limiting the duplication of results for confirmation first, the rise of “paper mill” journals taking advantage of demand, small sample sizes & inadequate statistics, pressure from some to be inventive of something doesn’t work and, of course, human error. There’s no single cause to account for the problem.
    1