logoalt Hacker News

ramraj07today at 4:03 AM2 repliesview on HN

It was not fraudulent, just incompetent. Not just here (though this is likely the most egregious example), there are many very bad biological models in circulation even today simply because some dudes who are thought leaders decided these things were this way when there was no causal evidence for it (it was almost always correlation). Thats right, our top scientists of the day still cant fundamentally fathom "correlation =/= causation"). Past examples include "a differentiated cell cant go back". Persistent examples include "longer telomeres cause you to live longer" and "there are x hallmarks of cancer."

And before someone says, "well theres nuance to it," "in hindsight its easy," "biology is complex," my answers are, no no and no. Debate me. Ill bring receipts.


Replies

UberFlytoday at 5:12 AM

The peer review process was repeatedly cheated by self-serving fraud. The medical field requires honest results and reporting. Why are you defending the fraud?

show 1 reply
DANmodetoday at 5:18 AM

For replying to me, can you skip to the part where you explicitly call out what you believe the cause may be,

as general of a label as it may be?