What a surprise. A state university in a state in which apple-growing is a huge part of the state economy (Washington state in the United States) issues a press

What a surprise. A state university in a state in which apple-growing is a huge part of the state economy (Washington state in the United States) issues a press release saying that eating apples is good for you, according to an in-vitro (test tube, not living subject) study funded by a grant from the university and published in an obscure journal about food chemistry but not directly about human health. Many, many submissions to HN are based at bottom on press releases, and press releases are well known for spinning preliminary research findings beyond all recognition. This has been commented on in the PhD comic "The Science News Cycle,"[1] which only exaggerates the process a very little. More serious commentary in the edited group blog post "Related by coincidence only? University and medical journal press releases versus journal articles"[2] points to the same danger of taking press releases (and news aggregator website articles based solely on press releases) too seriously. Press releases are usually misleading. The most sure and certain finding of any preliminary study will be that more research is needed. For the press release kindly submitted today, the in vitro (test tube) finding has to be replicated in living human beings before it means much at all. Moreover, we would still have to check whether all the other effects of eating more apples, on balance, do more than contribute to having more intestinal gas. All too often, preliminary findings don't lead to further useful discoveries in science, because the preliminary findings are flawed. The obligatory link for any discussion of a report on a research result like the one kindly submitted here is the article "Warning Signs in Experimental Design and Interpretation"[3] by Peter Norvig, director of research at Google, on how to interpret scientific research. Check each news story you read for how many of the important issues in interpreting research are NOT discussed in the story. [1] http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174 http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1174 [2] http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/related-by-coincidence-only-journal-press-releases-versus-journal-articles/ http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/related-by-coi... [3] http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html http://norvig.com/experiment-design.html