Why P-values Cannot Tell You If a Hypothesis Is Correct
ananyo writes "P values, the 'gold standard' of statistical validity, are not as reliable as many scientists assume. Critically, they cannot tell you the odds that a hypothesis is correct. A feature in Nature looks at why, if a result looks too good to be true, it probably is, despite an impressive-seeming P value."
Not a lot.
Eggs is a good example.
They where 'bad' becasue they had high cholesterol.
Science move on, and it turns out there are different kind of cholesterol, some 'good' some 'bad' so now eggs aren't as unhealthy as was thought.
Same with many things.
The media s the issue. It's can report science worth a damn.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Also there is a simpler analysis of the above article
MOD THE CHILD UP!
Fats, too. It was deemed that fats were bad for you, so instead of butter, use margarine. Better yet, skip the fats period. Bad for you.
Of course, it was also discovered that hydrogenation had a nasty habit of turning unsaturated fats into different chiral forms - "cis" and "trans". And guess what? The "trans" form of the fat is really, really, really bad for you (yes, that's the same "trans" in trans fats). Suddenly butter wasn't such an unreasonable option anymore as margarine as margarine had to undergo hydrogenation.
Not to mention the effort to go "low fat" has had nasty side effects of its own - the overuse of sugar and salt to replace the taste that fats had, resulting in even worse health problems (obesity, heart disease) than just having the fat to begin with.
(And no, banning trans fats doesn't mean they ban "yummy stuff" - there's plenty of fats you can cook with to still get the "yummy" without all the trans fats.)