If you don't automatically belive something, that you shouldn't follow up becuase why would you belive the next results.
So by your reasoning, only initial studies should be done. If you belive the results of the initial study, then obviously all further studies will corolate with the inital one.
Also by your reasoning, if you don't belive the inital studies, then there is no reason to follow up, becuase you don't belive, and therefore know the follow up will have the same results.
Nice Logic
Saying that you don't belive a study, or that it sounds bogus, or sounds flawed, and pointing out the flows, is much differerent then being certain the study is flawed.
A single study of 3000 is meaningless, open to questions, open to flukes, open to coincidences.
15 studies, by 15 different research groups, in 15 different areas, with identical rules, now if they all pointed the same way, there might be something to it. |
