• some_guy@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Perhaps researchers did do this, and found that there was no difference, but decided not to publish that.

    Well hey if we are just gonna play “what if everything is a conspiracy” then maybe researchers found that Johnson and Johnson talc powder was actually sourced from Proxima Centauri but decided not to publish that little trade secret.

    • Showroom7561
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      LOL. I hear you.

      Someone had to know something to come up with an accusation like that. It wouldn’t be out of the scope of reality for researchers (usually the ones being paid by the product manufacturer) to omit some critical details of the study. Not saying that’s what happened here, but J&J knows something we don’t.

    • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lack of publishing null results is a problem in science. A lot of journals don’t like null results and the types of journals that are happy to publish such (like PLOS) often cost money (only ~$1k-2k per article) but also a ton of time that researchers don’t have for something that would do nothing to benefit their careers.

      I don’t think Showroom was saying which researchers did the study or implying any sort of ill intentions. Just scientists looking out for the careers, and spending a ton of time making a publishable article to say “we found nothing” isn’t exactly useful for them.