The reliability of biomedical science: A case history of a maturing experimental field

There is much discussion in the media and some of the scientific literature of how many of the conclusions from scientific research should be doubted. These critiques often focus on studies – typically in non‐experimental spheres of biomedical and social sciences – that search large datasets for nov...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:BioEssays 2022-06, Vol.44 (6), p.e2200020-n/a
Main Author: Michell, Robert H.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Biological effects
Biological research
cancer
cell signalling
Diet
Dietary supplements
fatty liver
fraud
Hypotheses
Inositol
Inositols
Metabolic disorders
PCOS
Phospholipids
Social sciences
Statistical analysis
Statistics
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:There is much discussion in the media and some of the scientific literature of how many of the conclusions from scientific research should be doubted. These critiques often focus on studies – typically in non‐experimental spheres of biomedical and social sciences – that search large datasets for novel correlations, with a risk that inappropriate statistical evaluations might yield dubious conclusions. By contrast, results from experimental biological research can often be interpreted largely without statistical analysis. Typically: novel observation(s) are reported, and an explanatory hypothesis is offered; multiple labs undertake experiments to test the hypothesis; interpretation of the results may refute the hypothesis, support it or provoke its modification; the test/revise sequence is reiterated many times; and the field moves forward. I illustrate this experimental/non‐experimental dichotomy by examining the contrasting recent histories of: (a) our remarkable and growing understanding of how several inositol‐containing phospholipids contribute to the lives of eukaryote cells; and (b) the difficulty of achieving any agreed mechanistic understanding of why consuming dietary supplements of inositol is clinically beneficial in some metabolic diseases. We have a growing understanding of exactly how inositol phospholipids contribute to several cellular functions, but we still do not understand why eating supplementary inositol ameliorates some metabolic diseases. This illustrates an important difference between biomedical problems that are and are not currently susceptible to precise mechanistic analysis.
ISSN:0265-9247
1521-1878
DOI:10.1002/bies.202200020