{"id":134,"date":"2013-10-30T15:04:02","date_gmt":"2013-10-30T04:04:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/?p=134"},"modified":"2013-11-01T06:32:20","modified_gmt":"2013-10-31T19:32:20","slug":"the-economist-calls-scientific-method-out","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/?p=134","title":{"rendered":"The Economist on science"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Economist goes in hard on science, with plenty of compelling insights:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>VC&#8217;s believe half of published scientific research cannot be replicated, though the figures cited from Amgen and Bayer are even more dismal<\/li>\n<li>between 2000 and 2010, 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research later retracted<\/li>\n<li>1 in 3 researchers know of a colleague who has fudged results<\/li>\n<li>Negative results now account for 14% of papers, down from 30% in 1990<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>The false trails laid down by shoddy research are an unforgivable barrier to understanding.<\/p>\n<p>Source:\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.economist.com\/news\/leaders\/21588069-scientific-research-has-changed-world-now-it-needs-change-itself-how-science-goes-wrong\">http:\/\/www.economist.com\/news\/leaders\/21588069-scientific-research-has-changed-world-now-it-needs-change-itself-how-science-goes-wrong<\/a><\/p>\n<p>PDF:\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/Problems-with-scientific-research_-How-science-goes-wrong-_-The-Economist.pdf\">Problems with scientific research<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Economist goes in hard on science, with plenty of compelling insights: VC&#8217;s believe half of published scientific research cannot be replicated, though the figures cited from Amgen and Bayer are even more dismal between 2000 and 2010, 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research later retracted 1 in 3 researchers know &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/?p=134\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">The Economist on science<\/span> <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-134","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-musings","category-research-methodology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/134","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=134"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/134\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":147,"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/134\/revisions\/147"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=134"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=134"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.panicola.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=134"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}