I reallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyreallyre allyreally hate 'science' news

[161803398874989]

Because the only things you see are the results of one study, often done with a minimal sample, with complete disregard for the specifics of the study and its limitations, as well as blowing up the actual result, interpreting the results incorrectly, not giving specifics and other stuff like that. They don't even link the damn study, so we're just going to have to believe them!

I. Hate. It.

[tigersheart]

which is why I only give about 1% credence to any 'study' posted by the news.

[Good Row G]

Yes, I say yes, I mean yes.

YES!

[bigm141414]

As to linking to the original material most can't due to the fact they study is usually in a paid/subscription based journal.

But I agree news is often hastily written by bloggers who are trying to meet content deadline and so it it almost always light on facts, just the talking points.

[Luthorcrow]

I think you just need to be more selective about where you get your science news from. The daily newspaper and TV programs have terrible science reporting because most of them no longer employee actual journalists that specialize in science writing. There is a yearly anthology of the best of science writing (both scientists and science journalists) series called "The Best of American Science Writing" that I have been reading since 2007 and it continues to be top notch.

In fact the 2011 edition has a great article title "The Trouble with Scientists" by Deborah Blum about how scientists reluctance to write for the layman is hurting science that is really good. As well another article by Charles Homans titled "Hot Air" about the split between climatologists and meteorologist and specifically how climatologists lost the war of words with your local weatherman.

[oystergirl]

well, you know what they say about statistics......as for news....I have been on a self imposed news ban for about 5 years and I have never been healthier or felt better....

[Ryan Sannar]

This ^ Politics make me feel the same way too.

[joeyb]

What I hate is when a miracle drug that cures cancer or HIV is announced, but nothing ever comes of it. Basically, it's the same thing that you mentioned. It's a small study on rats and the news is released so that the scientists can, hopefully, get more funding. Nothing ever comes of it, though, because the research was faulty or the drug would be too expensive to do testing on and no big pharma companies will pay for the research, testing, and FDA approval process because they won't make money on it.

[morethanjustamom]

well, you know what they say about statistics......as for news....I have been on a self imposed news ban for about 5 years and I have never been healthier or felt better....

This for me as well. Politics too.

[Timmy M]

[cline]

Someone who works with health research every day, lemme jest say: I read almost no mainstream media health coverage.

And politics, Gah. Nope.

[drsloomis]

There is a yearly anthology of the best of science writing (both scientists and science journalists) series called "The Best of American Science Writing" that I have been reading since 2007 and it continues to be top notch.

Strongly seconded. The other nice thing about the Science anthology is that it culls most of the fluff that rises and falls in the 24 hour news cycle--if it makes it into the anthology, it's worth reading.

[Rooks]

I love that song. Wait... I don't think that's right in this thread. Crap....

[fiftiesdean]

They don't even link the damn study, so we're just going to have to believe them!

that is why you need to be picky about what you read. most of the stuff out there (no matter the topic) is terrible.

[Waldo]

Eh I don't have an issue with it. Maybe I have a good BS filter or keep my interests to low BS fields like physics and engineering.

[BarefootDawsy]

I was just griping about this today! It's ruining my faith in science. My biggest wish? A barefoot running study with more than a dozen participants....dare I say a couple hundred (minimum) would be better?

[Timmy M]

I love that song. Wait... I don't think that's right in this thread. Crap....

it's alright after all I laugh and I live and I have love to give but sometimes all you can do is hate...

And it goes ah lie ah lalalalie ah lalalalie ah lalalalie ah lalalalie ah lalalalie ah lalalalie!

[161803398874989]

Eh I don't have an issue with it. Maybe I have a good BS filter or keep my interests to low BS fields like physics and engineering.

Yeah, physics and engineering are usually one of the better fields. However, there's a lot of BS floating around with quantum physics (they still haven't built a quantum computer ).

Mathematics is even more awesome as NOONE can publish something that isn't true (in the axiomatic, mathematical sense) and not get called out on it.

[joeyb]

Yeah, physics and engineering are usually one of the better fields. However, there's a lot of BS floating around with quantum physics (they still haven't built a quantum computer ).

Mathematics is even more awesome as NOONE can publish something that isn't true (in the axiomatic, mathematical sense) and not get called out on it.

That's because they either post a *proof* or something that they have made up as a new way to look at things and it needs to get scrutinized, not a half-assed study where the numbers have been fudged to make their point.

[Atalan]

That's because they either post a *proof* or something that they have made up as a new way to look at things and it needs to get scrutinized, not a half-assed study where the numbers have been fudged to make their point.

Or an anthropological study when the writer is the only person with current physical access to the site or artifact in question.