4 ms·
> So the exposure group were in a semi-sealed chamber where other toxins might have accumulated, and were subjected to continuous fan noise. Whereas the control
by DoingIsLearning 5y ago
> So the exposure group were in a semi-sealed chamber where other toxins might have accumulated, and were subjected to continuous fan noise. Whereas the control group were not in a chamber and were not subjected to fan noise.
It's fine to be critical of methodology, but if they are testing for lung function and tissue compliance, then I am struggling to find a reason for fan noise to be a lurking variable in this case.
- ben_w 5y agoDepends on the effect of general stress from the environment? Cortisol isn’t exactly a great thing for us to marinate in. (That is way out of my field of expertise, I don’t know how to properly gauge the relative strength of effect of stress hormones vs. CO2)
- krastanov 5y agoFrequently, in experiments done before "double blind" and "control group" became the standard, we had results where something for which we were "struggling to find a reason" to be important, actually turned out to be important. In a properly done experiment we would not need to have a conversation in which lay people guess what else might have affected the results.