4 ms·

Head's up on the publication's goal: > Medical Hypotheses is a forum for ideas in medicine and related biomedical sciences. It will publish interesting and imp

Head's up on the publication's goal: > Medical Hypotheses is a forum for ideas in medicine and related biomedical sciences. It will publish interesting and important theoretical papers that foster the diversity and debate upon which the scientific process thrives. [. . .] Medical Hypotheses was therefore launched, and still exists today, to give novel, radical new ideas and speculations in medicine open-minded consideration, opening the field to radical hypotheses which would be rejected by most conventional journals. Papers in Medical Hypotheses take a standard scientific form in terms of style, structure and referencing. The journal therefore constitutes a bridge between cutting-edge theory and the mainstream of medical and scientific communication, which ideas must eventually enter if they are to be critiqued and tested against observations. Not saying it's completely without merit, but this should not be interpreted as a scientific study of any type.

shawn 8y ago
this should not be interpreted as a scientific study of any type. Feynman was intensely interested in the paranormal, and said that it was important for any physicist to be. Because if it were true, that's exactly where you'd find the truth. Now, I'm not standing up for alternative medicine. But the subject is beside the point. You said "This isn't science," but didn't point to any examples of why. Anyone who follows the scientific method is doing science. Science isn't an exclusive clique; everyone can do it.
resu_nimda 8y ago
Pretty unnecessary FUD. Did you have any objection to the actual content? How did you determine that the work was "not a scientific study of any type"? Seems un-scientific to dismiss the whole thing based on that paragraph.
- duxup 8y ago
  I didn't read his comment as "dismiss the whole thing".
- scott_s 8y ago
  Looking at the abstract (there are several links in the comments), I think it's accurate to say it's not a scientific study because it's not a study. That is, to me, a "study" implies some systematic examination of some observable thing. But this paper is more a formal hypothesis: the author is proposing that a particular phenomenon exists, with some anecdotal support. That means that the story title is not accurate, as it declares the thing exists, when the entire point of the paper is that it may exist.
  - resu_nimda 8y ago
    That means that the story title is not accurate, as it declares the thing exists, when the entire point of the paper is that it may exist. To be fair that is on par with a lot of science journalism (though I do realize this article was published by the journal itself). But I take the point and on a closer read I understand the original comment a bit better, the journal isn't actually purporting to put forth scientific studies, just hypotheses.

shawn 8y ago

this should not be interpreted as a scientific study of any type. Feynman was intensely interested in the paranormal, and said that it was important for any physicist to be. Because if it were true, that's exactly where you'd find the truth. Now, I'm not standing up for alternative medicine. But the subject is beside the point. You said "This isn't science," but didn't point to any examples of why. Anyone who follows the scientific method is doing science. Science isn't an exclusive clique; everyone can do it.

resu_nimda 8y ago

Pretty unnecessary FUD. Did you have any objection to the actual content? How did you determine that the work was "not a scientific study of any type"? Seems un-scientific to dismiss the whole thing based on that paragraph.

duxup 8y ago
I didn't read his comment as "dismiss the whole thing".
scott_s 8y ago
Looking at the abstract (there are several links in the comments), I think it's accurate to say it's not a scientific study because it's not a study. That is, to me, a "study" implies some systematic examination of some observable thing. But this paper is more a formal hypothesis: the author is proposing that a particular phenomenon exists, with some anecdotal support. That means that the story title is not accurate, as it declares the thing exists, when the entire point of the paper is that it may exist.
- resu_nimda 8y ago
  That means that the story title is not accurate, as it declares the thing exists, when the entire point of the paper is that it may exist. To be fair that is on par with a lot of science journalism (though I do realize this article was published by the journal itself). But I take the point and on a closer read I understand the original comment a bit better, the journal isn't actually purporting to put forth scientific studies, just hypotheses.