[split] Chippy vs the World
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-11-2013, 06:22 PM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 06:25 PM by Cathym112.)
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:06 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:06 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  For someone who knows so much about clinical trials, you forgot that double blind eliminates risk of bias. This study was not double blind.

No it doesn't. Th purpose of a double-blind is to eliminate the placebo effect and other nonspecific effect such as the Hawthorne effect and it doesn't apply to meta-analysis and systematic reviews.

You don't know anything about experiment design, systematic reviews or meta-analysis.

Negative. Double blind simply means that the testor, nor the recipient know who has te control and who has the active drug.

It eliminates both bias and the placebo effect.

Noun: double-blind study - an experimental procedure in which neither the subjects of the experiment nor the persons administering the experiment know the critical aspects of the experiment; "a double-blind procedure is used to guard against both experimenter bias and placebo effects"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict....lind+study

You were SPECIFICALLY asked for double blind studies that of which you demanded from Dr. Fulton to support your assertion.

NOTHING you cited was double blind, although you created the implication that they were double blind. You presumed that no one would read the actual studies. All 346 pages of the first study you cited. You fail. Completely.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:23 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 05:42 PM)Chippy Wrote:  You are an idiot. ... It is you that is retarded.

You really like being a prick, don't you? Where's that shit even come from? Some deep-seated insecurity? Girly's every bit as sharp as you, got credentials and income far exceeding yours I'd wager and I've never felt the desire to be a prick like you. Your Momma didn't hug you enough or what? Seriously, where's this venom coming from? And don't give Girly no shit about "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" 'cause I'm quite familiar with a wide variety of different truth systems.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
03-11-2013, 06:23 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 12:54 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 11:47 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I think you are being a little nitty, it was clear what he meant.

No. He's not. Chippy admitted that "that can be read two ways" in regards to what HoC meant. If he can demand specificity regarding English, then he needs to be precise in his communication. Otherwise he is being a hypocritical twit

I wasn't demanding specificity of HoC.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:32 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 10:52 AM)Stevil Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 05:37 AM)Chippy Wrote:  The burden of evidence always falls on the claimant.
I am so happy that we both agree.
You made the claim
Whatever benefit--if any at all--can be realised by just taking them at the RDA.

You demanded of Mark evidence in the form of double-blind placebo controlled clinical trials
Now instead of being a weasel I am again offering you an opportunity to become a man.
Provide the evidence backing your claim. (Man up!)

You've been asked repeatedly for double blind studies to back up your assertion. You have failed on all accounts although you cited studies with the implication that they were Double blind (they weren't).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:33 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:22 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 06:06 PM)Chippy Wrote:  No it doesn't. Th purpose of a double-blind is to eliminate the placebo effect and other nonspecific effect such as the Hawthorne effect and it doesn't apply to meta-analysis and systematic reviews.

You don't know anything about experiment design, systematic reviews or meta-analysis.

Negative. Double blind simply means that the testor, nor the recipient know who has te control and who has the active drug.

It eliminates both bias and the placebo effect.

Noun: double-blind study - an experimental procedure in which neither the subjects of the experiment nor the persons administering the experiment know the critical aspects of the experiment; "a double-blind procedure is used to guard against both experimenter bias and placebo effects"

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict....lind+study

You were SPECIFICALLY asked for double blind studies that of which you demanded from Dr. Fulton to support your assertion.

NOTHING you cited was double blind. You fail. Completely.

A systematic review and a meta-analysis aren't experiments they are methods of collating and analysis existing studies and forming a result based on the aggregated studies. There are no human subjects in meta-analytic studies and systematic reviews and there is no experiment hence there can be no placebo effect. There is no such thing as a double-blind meta-analysis or systematic review.

What I provided you is the highest quality and most reliable form of evidence that exists in evidence-based medicine:

[Image: 4.2.7.1.jpg]

[Image: ebm-pyramid.gif]

You are really showing off your ignorance here. But keep going, please. You are proving my point that you are an idiot.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:36 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:32 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 10:52 AM)Stevil Wrote:  I am so happy that we both agree.
You made the claim
Whatever benefit--if any at all--can be realised by just taking them at the RDA.

You demanded of Mark evidence in the form of double-blind placebo controlled clinical trials
Now instead of being a weasel I am again offering you an opportunity to become a man.
Provide the evidence backing your claim. (Man up!)

You've been asked repeatedly for double blind studies to back up your assertion. You have failed on all accounts although you cited studies with the implication that they were Double blind (they weren't).

Meta-analytical studies and systematic reviews of double-blind placebo controlled studies are the highest quality of medical evidence in existence. There is no such thing as a double-blind meta-analysis or systematic review because there are no test subjects or testers to blind. Keep digging that hole.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:41 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:36 PM)Chippy Wrote:  Meta-analytical studies and systematic reviews of double-blind placebo controlled studies are the highest quality of medical evidence in existence.

It's just basic statistics dude. No call to sanctify it.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:42 PM (This post was last modified: 04-11-2013 01:39 AM by Chippy.)
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:23 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You really like being a prick, don't you?

In cases like this when I know I am right, yes I do because I am amused by the spectacle of self-immolation. I've offered the piece of rope and there is a rush for it. This is amusing. It is amusing to see people that accuse you of being stupid and ignorant making complete idiots of themselves.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:47 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:41 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 06:36 PM)Chippy Wrote:  Meta-analytical studies and systematic reviews of double-blind placebo controlled studies are the highest quality of medical evidence in existence. There is no such thing as a double-blind meta-analysis or systematic review because there are no test subjects or testers to blind. Keep digging that hole.

It's just basic statistics dude. No call to sanctify it.

It's not basic statistics. ANOVA and meta-analysis are actually advanced topics. Systematic reviews aren't inferential statistical methods.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 06:50 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 06:42 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 06:23 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You really like being a prick, don't you?

In cases like this when I know I right, yes I do because I am amused by the spectacle of self-immolation. I've offered the piece of rope and there is a rush for it. This is amusing. It is amusing to see people that accuse you of being stupid and ignorant making complete idiots of themselves.

Well then. Girly's pretty sure you've overstayed your welcome, asshole.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: