Eek!

[anonemouse 1]

The woman is driving me insane. I'm talking about a certain person over on OH that doesn't come here. She is one of those people that constantly seems to have a holier-than-thou approach to everything. I just caught her misrepresenting the results of a scientific study. She literally added on to the end of the abstract, making the authors seem to make conclusions they simply did not make. I can stand her otherwise, but THAT pissed me off. As a scientist myself, I know that you just don't do that if you want to keep any credibility.

[shues138 35]

You should just get out there and challenge her! What gives her the right to change an abstract on a research journal article? People take a lot of time and people give a lot of money for that research to be done!

[anonemouse 1]

You should just get out there and challenge her! What gives her the right to change an abstract on a research journal article? People take a lot of time and people give a lot of money for that research to be done!

I did. I posted and told her (and everyone else) straight-out that she was misrepresenting the results. I mean, were the conclusions she added probably true? Yeah. But the authors did not make them because they didn't have enough evidence. If they DID have the evidence to make the conclusion, they WOULD have.

[shues138 35]

Some people just don't get it!!!! They figure they are "interpreting the results" in their own way.

[anonemouse 1]

Some people just don't get it!!!! They figure they are "interpreting the results" in their own way.

I know! What really got to me was that she literally extended the last sentence of the conclusions to include what she wrote. I mean, speculate all you want about what the trend in statistics will show a few years down the line (the abstract was of an article that compared the results of all RNY and lap-band studies that were printed in all English language journals and had at least 100 participants and 3 years follow-up), but don't you dare add on to the actual freaking abstract and make the authors say things they didn't say!

I mean, I've speculated myself about the results of that particular study. I even posted the abstract on LBT. The results they have do seem to indicate that once long term results (>10 years post-op) are compared for RNY and lap-band, that lap-band will probably come out ahead. But there simply isn't enough evidence to say that for sure at this point. The authors could only make conclusions about short term (up to 3 years post-op) and middle term weight loss (>3 years post-op), because there wasn't enough data available for long term comparison of the two procedures.