Medical Research Fraud

The cluster centers on debates about widespread fraud, unreliability, and skepticism toward medical and health research, frequently referencing studies in journals like The Lancet, BMJ, and figures like Ioannidis, with discussions on whether to assume research is fraudulent until proven otherwise.

📉 Falling 0.3x Health
4,121
Comments
20
Years Active
5
Top Authors
#1365
Topic ID

Activity Over Time

2007
1
2008
10
2009
34
2010
81
2011
57
2012
57
2013
120
2014
100
2015
133
2016
147
2017
180
2018
229
2019
329
2020
605
2021
573
2022
523
2023
355
2024
297
2025
275
2026
15

Keywords

e.g pubmed.ncbi X0006 BS med.com SAPIENS andrewgelman.com PIIS2589 PIIS0140 economist.com study science autism research peer article scientists peer reviewed health medical

Sample Comments

gyudin Feb 24, 2023 View on HN

You've described pretty much every politician or any doctor that posses outdated informationhttps://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/02/22/...

towaway1138 Feb 12, 2019 View on HN

Not STEM, but rather science and medicine.Instead of this clickbait article, how about linking to the actual Lancet issue: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/issue/vol393no1017...

danuker Jul 23, 2021 View on HN

Just 3 days ago this was on Hacker News:"Time to assume that health research is fraudulent until proven otherwise?"https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27884233

Pyramus Nov 22, 2021 View on HN

The author is a known quack, please stop spreading misinformation.https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29298178

WoodenChair Dec 5, 2020 View on HN

I feel this way too, but I often find those circulating articles are in mainstream media by people who don't understand what they're reporting on or in "science will cure everything" blogs. However, this is a summary posted on one of the most respected journals in the world's website. The article/study it is summarizing was peer reviewed and developed by scientists at some of the world's top institutions. Sure, we shouldn't get caught up in reputation as a

dekhn Mar 18, 2021 View on HN

There is absolutely not enough evidence from this particular doctor to justify the claim. It's irresponsible to publish this.

orhmeh09 Nov 16, 2020 View on HN

Please heed this warning from the linked thread:> Comments like this are gonna quickly turn this place into just another /r/science, where people of no particular qualification chime in and try to make themselves feel smart by contradicting a peer reviewed study without taking the actual effort needed to properly question a peer reviewed study, especially one in as prestigious a journal as the Lancet.Thank you. Nobody’s interested in your level of incredulity, however you ital

celticninja Oct 5, 2021 View on HN

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n490Sounds like the BMJ dont trust this chap and are questioning his financial interests. Therefore I would question his motives with regard to this article, he isnt very forthcoming which is usually indicative of having something to hide.

petee Jan 3, 2022 View on HN

My point with that statement was the article posted clearly says the reason, but everyone piles on like its a conspiracy, ignoring the words in their face. The title is skewed and misleading to rile up people.(edited to remove words I didnt mean) He can't back up his information either, but I'm not a doctor. Other doctors disagree. Im sure I couldn't find a source you would accept. And most of us are not qualified to digest the information anyway. I've seen enough to regar

johnx123-up Apr 7, 2021 View on HN

Probably relevant https://jeannelenzer.com/scientific-american-scandal