Are you under the impression that clinical trials are constantly saying the opposite from one another?
That, mysteriously, new trials with awesome results appear every 30 seconds?
That you can always find that one trial that will prove your point?
That big companies manipulate data?
That shady websites only cite the conclusions that are good for them?
If so, you’re not wrong… and it’s super easy to do, by the way.
Here’s a guide on how to make a clinical trial say whatever you want it to say!
Translation by Gabrielle Larocque.
Posted in Comics
Tagged 97% of terminal cancer patients previously had this procedure, analysis, animals, arguments, big, cells, change, claims, clinical relevance, clinical trial, company, complex, conclusions, confuse, control group, critical appraisal, critical review, data, detractors, difference, dissect, effect size, error, flaws, fundamental research, graphs, group, healthcare professional, holistic, humans, interpretation, journalist, kale, language skills, large-scale, marketing, meaningful, mice, news stories, number, observational, patients, pharma, pharmaceutical companies, placebo, preliminary, prospective, randomized, replicate, science, scientific background, self-made expert, shortcuts, simplistic, size, small, statistical concepts, statistical power, statistical significance, statistically significant, statistics, stats, study, subgroup, test tubes, torture, trivial, words
