Jump to content
Mental Support Community

"Lies, Damned Lies, and Medical Science (Statistics)"


Guest Klingsor
 Share

Recommended Posts

Remember the MMR scare? (well its still going on in the usa isn't it?)

That came from a paper in the "The Lancet"- one of the uk's best med journals.

Peer reviewing didnt expose it- it was eventually retracted but only because one of the authors was exposed as a fraud.

There are a range of 'standards of clinical findings" and some medical literature is suspect - especially in the public domain.

However there is also excellent practice going on too.

So although I do support conventional medicine I always keep a critical eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great find Klingsor! This was one of my points with you know who. But unless I could support it with a peer-reviewed study I was talking to a wall. I am also very curious as to the responses this will hopefully generate. And it has been our point that the studies on penis size are all flawed to some degree. Most of them, the sample size was either not large enough or not randomized enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent article Klingsor. I read a book by a British author that blasted the psychiatric community and drug companis for their laughable studies of drug effectiveness in the area of mental health.

Anecdotal evidence is dismissed too quickly by experts in my opinion.

Here is my rock bottom conclusion about people: they will always do what they perceive to be in their interest. This is bias. The dumber the person the more near term the bias. Smarter people are able to project out years in determining their self interest and this can obfuscate the bias but it is still there.

Knowing this can be a very powerful tool when dealing w people. Example: I observed my new supervisor and saw that what she enjoys is being a celebrity in the office. She loves flattering attention from men. She hates work or problems. I act accordingly as I have bills to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great find Klingsor! This was one of my points with you know who. But unless I could support it with a peer-reviewed study I was talking to a wall. I am also very curious as to the responses this will hopefully generate. And it has been our point that the studies on penis size are all flawed to some degree. Most of them, the sample size was either not large enough or not randomized enough.

I agree that ALL penis studies have imperfections.

However that does not mean that anecdotal evidence is superior to peer reviewed studies!

Really thorough, double blind, randomised experiments or data searches always show that homeopathy is a fraud and no link between MMR and autism for example.

But if you rely on poorly designed studies or anecdotal evidence than you get the reverse conclusion for both those issues!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in the mood to chime in. First any study they reports an average value of anything without reporting the median value is suspect. Also in determining the average the right question must be asked. The question should be what is the average size for men in relationships.

Studies cannot control what the interpretation of the results will be. Some 5" guys might think "oh wow at least I am in the average range" while another says to himself "what woman is going to be impressed w the low side of average?".

Klingsor, Small, Jessie, NY - you guys have got some serious brain power going on. Put that toward making money & living happily. Take it from a 52 yr old guy - you'll be glad you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think everyone is misunderstanding Klingsor and I. Klingsor, if I am incorrect please correct me. Our (or mine) point of view is not to throw out scientific research and just go with anecdotal evidence with everything in life. Of course science is the best we have for the search of absolute truth. We are merely trying to say (and seemingly having a hard time doing so) that not ALL peer-reviewed studies are correct. And, just because it was a peer-reviewed study published in a medical journal doesn't AUTOMATICALLY make it correct. Intelligent people question things. Especially when they are observing (anecdotal) the opposite. If I had slept with 3 or 4 women in my life and half of them told me I was small when they were pissed off at me, I would dismiss that based on the fact that they were pissed off and it was a tiny sample size (damn puns). But that's not the case. I have a great deal of anecdotal evidence. After it started to accumulate and started to paint a different picture than the peer-reviewed studies, quite honestly, I'd be stupid not to question it. I tried to present that argument before, but was called a troll. It seemed, the only point he was willing to even listen to was one that was backed with a peer-reviewed study. I am unaware of any peer-reviewed study that was done to disprove the validity of peer-reviewed studies. So Klingsor provided the next best thing. Again, great find Klingsor. I think it would be more worthwhile to start dissecting the actual peer-reviewed studies on penis size. I think it was Roger that referred to the custom fit condom study. I am not familiar with the study and I don't have time to google it right now. But the very first question that comes to mind for me is about the method of data collection. Specifically, how were the men selected?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, found it and skimmed it really quick. Right off the bat it was stated that men who reported measuring while receiving oral sex had slightly larger penises. Is that because they are more aroused or more likely to get oral sex from their partner due to their larger size? Here is where anecdotal evidence is now required. In my experience, the latter is absolutely true. Is it the case in this study? I have no idea. But obviously I'm gonna lean that way because that's what THE ONLY EVIDENCE I HAVE points to. Obviously that would make the average seem larger, but I'm just pointing out how anecdotal evidence plays a role in drawing your own conclusion. When a person automatically dismisses anecdotal evidence simply because it doesn't line up with certain studies, then they are being closed minded. Aren't studies done to seek truth? When has being close minded and un-open to new points of view ever been a good thing?

But still, my main question for this study (I didn't find the answer) is how did they get their sample of men. How did they come across guys looking for fitted condoms? Because I would guess that smaller sized men are more likely to seek out custom fit condoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My anecdotal evidence might seem small too- 5 ladies.

But my OBSERVED evidence- either direct conversation or witness to conversation is extensive.

And you have the 3rd party observations when I heard guys or girls talk about OTHER girls views on size

"my mate Sally just dumped her boyfriend cos of his skinny dick" etc

This is multiple age groups, in different locations, in different contexts.

Then you have the 'double speak' from experts…. I have lost count of the classic lines from Em & Lo, or Dobson & Ross.

As a young boy I could never have imagined how critical the issue is to the vast majority of girls in our culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About science, I think it's a good idea to question the process, to recognize possible flaws, to be aware of potential biases, to be objective and always try to improve the validity of studies. This offers a system of checks and balances, which I think is needed.

Edited by IrmaJean
adding
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...