2 ms·

"These results were presented at a meeting. The final results will be eventually published in a peer-reviewed journal." They could put the information on their

by nonbel 11y ago

"These results were presented at a meeting. The final results will be eventually published in a peer-reviewed journal." They could put the information on their own webpage for all I care, as long as they are willing to stake their reputations on it. The point is that we, the audience, do not have access to the requisite information (methods, data, background refs they trust) to even start attempting to judge the claims. Even if a conference talk/poster/abstract is available somewhere, that is an extremely limited format of communication.

mbreese 11y ago
With all due respect, in all likelihood, you are not the audience for this talk (I honestly don't know). For those who are in the field, who were at the talk, I'm sure there was more than enough information presented for them to judge the claims (one way or the other). Think of this as a preprint for the paper. It's just a talk. If you want to blame anyone here, you could blame the media for reporting on a talk. But then again, the public likes to hear good news about cancer research, so I think the media is okay on this one.
- nonbel 11y ago
  >"For those who are in the field, who were at the talk, I'm sure there was more than enough information presented for them to judge the claims (one way or the other)." I can assure you 100% this is not the case. Perhaps they could get that info by extensively talking to the presenter afterwards (which will not be recorded), but no way you can fit it into a 15-60 min talk or onto a poster, or any way that will be shared later. Not physically possible. Edit: Ok, I imagined a bunch of androids like Data (star trek character), and believe it may be physically possible but would require superhuman capabilities to transmit and process information.
  - mbreese 11y ago
    What I think is getting glossed over is that this wasn't a lay audience they are talking to... it's an audience who knows the field and prior research. There is a lot that the presenter doesn't have to go over, since it's already assumed that the audience already knows it. So in this case, they need to present only what is new and novel. There is more than enough time for this. If you're not in that field, then no, you're not going to walk away with a good understanding of the work. Talks are always tailored to the audience.
    - nonbel 11y ago
      My issue is with talking to the media. The people at the conference (should) realize it is just a high level overview (usually with preliminary data) presented to let them know what is going on and get them interested in the topic. It is not taken as a serious venue to make any claims. Also, did the link change? I can't find the line I originally quoted anymore.

by nonbel 11y ago

mbreese 11y ago

With all due respect, in all likelihood, you are not the audience for this talk (I honestly don't know). For those who are in the field, who were at the talk, I'm sure there was more than enough information presented for them to judge the claims (one way or the other). Think of this as a preprint for the paper. It's just a talk. If you want to blame anyone here, you could blame the media for reporting on a talk. But then again, the public likes to hear good news about cancer research, so I think the media is okay on this one.

nonbel 11y ago
>"For those who are in the field, who were at the talk, I'm sure there was more than enough information presented for them to judge the claims (one way or the other)." I can assure you 100% this is not the case. Perhaps they could get that info by extensively talking to the presenter afterwards (which will not be recorded), but no way you can fit it into a 15-60 min talk or onto a poster, or any way that will be shared later. Not physically possible. Edit: Ok, I imagined a bunch of androids like Data (star trek character), and believe it may be physically possible but would require superhuman capabilities to transmit and process information.
- mbreese 11y ago
  What I think is getting glossed over is that this wasn't a lay audience they are talking to... it's an audience who knows the field and prior research. There is a lot that the presenter doesn't have to go over, since it's already assumed that the audience already knows it. So in this case, they need to present only what is new and novel. There is more than enough time for this. If you're not in that field, then no, you're not going to walk away with a good understanding of the work. Talks are always tailored to the audience.
  - nonbel 11y ago
    My issue is with talking to the media. The people at the conference (should) realize it is just a high level overview (usually with preliminary data) presented to let them know what is going on and get them interested in the topic. It is not taken as a serious venue to make any claims. Also, did the link change? I can't find the line I originally quoted anymore.