Did you read the original article in Nature before devising your ad hominem? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a.html http://www.natur

Did you read the original article in Nature before devising your ad hominem? http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a... They certainly had access to the original data. To quote: > To address these concerns, when findings could not be reproduced, an attempt was made to contact the original authors, discuss the discrepant findings, exchange reagents and repeat experiments under the authors' direction, occasionally even in the laboratory of the original investigator. There are quite a few other studies which raise similar questions statistics about medical research; e.g.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11600885 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11600885 http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v14/n9/full/nn.2886.html http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v14/n9/full/nn.2886.html http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435605000235 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435605... http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31818131e7 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e31818131e7