Artwork

Content provided by Peter Attia, MD, Peter Attia, and MD. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Peter Attia, MD, Peter Attia, and MD or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

#143 - John Ioannidis, M.D., D.Sc.: Why most biomedical research is flawed, and how to improve it

1:52:01
 
Share
 

Manage episode 281520722 series 2394217
Content provided by Peter Attia, MD, Peter Attia, and MD. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Peter Attia, MD, Peter Attia, and MD or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
John Ioannidis is a physician, scientist, writer, and a Stanford University professor who studies scientific research itself, a process known as meta-research. In this episode, John discusses his staggering finding that the majority of published research is actually incorrect. Using nutritional epidemiology as the poster child for irreproducible findings, John describes at length the factors that play into these false positive results and offers numerous insights into how science can course correct. We discuss:
  • John’s background, and the synergy of mathematics, science, and medicine (2:40);
  • Why most published research findings are false (10:00);
  • The bending of data to reach ‘statistical significance,’ and the how bias impacts results (19:30);
  • The problem of power: How over- and under-powered studies lead to false positives (26:00);
  • Contrasting nutritional epidemiology with genetics research (31:00);
  • How to improve nutritional epidemiology and get more answers on efficacy (38:45);
  • How pre-existing beliefs impact science (52:30);
  • The antidote to questionable research practices infected with bias and bad incentive structures (1:03:45);
  • The different roles of public, private, and philanthropic sectors in funding high-risk research that asks the important questions (1:12:00);
  • Case studies demonstrating the challenge of epidemiology and how even the best studies can have major flaws (1:21:30);
  • Results of John’s study looking at the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, and the resulting vitriol revealing the challenge of doing science in a hyper-politicized environment (1:31:00);
  • John’s excitement about the future (1:47:45); and
  • More.

Learn more: https://peterattiamd.com/ Show notes page for this episode: https://peterattiamd.com/JohnIoannidis Subscribe to receive exclusive subscriber-only content: https://peterattiamd.com/subscribe/ Sign up to receive Peter's email newsletter: https://peterattiamd.com/newsletter/ Connect with Peter on Facebook | Twitter | Instagram.

  continue reading

346 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 281520722 series 2394217
Content provided by Peter Attia, MD, Peter Attia, and MD. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Peter Attia, MD, Peter Attia, and MD or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
John Ioannidis is a physician, scientist, writer, and a Stanford University professor who studies scientific research itself, a process known as meta-research. In this episode, John discusses his staggering finding that the majority of published research is actually incorrect. Using nutritional epidemiology as the poster child for irreproducible findings, John describes at length the factors that play into these false positive results and offers numerous insights into how science can course correct. We discuss:
  • John’s background, and the synergy of mathematics, science, and medicine (2:40);
  • Why most published research findings are false (10:00);
  • The bending of data to reach ‘statistical significance,’ and the how bias impacts results (19:30);
  • The problem of power: How over- and under-powered studies lead to false positives (26:00);
  • Contrasting nutritional epidemiology with genetics research (31:00);
  • How to improve nutritional epidemiology and get more answers on efficacy (38:45);
  • How pre-existing beliefs impact science (52:30);
  • The antidote to questionable research practices infected with bias and bad incentive structures (1:03:45);
  • The different roles of public, private, and philanthropic sectors in funding high-risk research that asks the important questions (1:12:00);
  • Case studies demonstrating the challenge of epidemiology and how even the best studies can have major flaws (1:21:30);
  • Results of John’s study looking at the seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2, and the resulting vitriol revealing the challenge of doing science in a hyper-politicized environment (1:31:00);
  • John’s excitement about the future (1:47:45); and
  • More.

Learn more: https://peterattiamd.com/ Show notes page for this episode: https://peterattiamd.com/JohnIoannidis Subscribe to receive exclusive subscriber-only content: https://peterattiamd.com/subscribe/ Sign up to receive Peter's email newsletter: https://peterattiamd.com/newsletter/ Connect with Peter on Facebook | Twitter | Instagram.

  continue reading

346 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide