3 ms·
I have a hard time parsing the outcomes section, the last sentence seems to contradict the previous ones? „ A total of 25 experimental studies and 44 epidemiol
by MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
I have a hard time parsing the outcomes section, the last sentence seems to contradict the previous ones?
„ A total of 25 experimental studies and 44 epidemiological studies were included. Consistent effects of analgesic and phthalate exposure on human fetal germ cell development are demonstrated in experimental models, correlating with evidence from epidemiological studies and animal models. Furthermore, analgesic-induced reduction in fetal testosterone production, which predisposes to the development of male reproductive disorders, has been reported in studies involving human tissues, which also supports data from animal and epidemiological studies.“
And then:
„ However, whilst reduced testosterone production has been demonstrated in animal studies following exposure(s) to a variety of environmental chemicals including phthalates and bisphenol A, these effects are not reproduced in experimental approaches using human fetal testis tissues.“
- e2e8 6y agoLast sentence is about environmental chemicals. Previous sentence is about analgesics.
- MrBuddyCasino 6y agoSo its analgesics vs „environmental chemicals including phthalates and bisphenol A“? Plausible, though they really should have worded that differently. My takeaway: keep painkillers like Aspirin, Ibuprofen and Paracetamol away from fetuses and small children.
- jl2718 6y agoWow, and those are doctor-recommended for treating just about any discomforts of pregnancy. Just think of everything we do to screw up our babies in-utero. What kind of effect does that have on society?
- achileas 6y agoIt's pretty clearly worded to me. That's the trouble with widely releasing research. It's generally (and, IMO, correctly) written in a specific language for a specific audience who can parse this. This is necessary because communicating research has to be extremely precise, but difficult because it requires training. In my senior year as an undergrad, it would take me 3-5 days to get through a paper and really understand it, and had entire classes that were based around understanding primary literature. In my first year of grad school I was reading dozens of papers in a month. This precise language is needed for replication (despite academic science being structurally unsuited to it) and hi-fidelity idea transmission, but is unsuitable for wider distribution because of the language. We need more skilled science communicators, not more *arxivs.
- MrBuddyCasino 6y agoI'm not lamenting precise or domain-specific language, this is just an instance of sloppy wording.