MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Just happened across this and thought it was a fascinating read. Because, we can trust what we read and hear when it's backed up by science, yes?
http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800
Ah man I thought this was about Portal 3.
this means climate change isn't real.
Nicely done. From my former position as a journo on the 'science news beat', this is an entirely predictable result.
I'm not sure they even needed to go to the trouble of conducting some research and getting it published in a journal. Quite a few media outlets would have churned it out straight off a press release quoting a fictitious journal, without even bothering to access the source material.
I think we used to be pretty unusual in a) actually reading the paper and making a judgement based on the sample size etc and b) making the proper effort to stick the paper in front of someone with some real expertise for their opinion.
just plain weird
[img] 
[/img]
Don't forget ,all scientists are not equal. 🙂
[img] 
[/img]
"For far too long, the people who cover this beat have treated it like gossip, echoing whatever they find in press releases"
It is a basic journalism problem, science, politics, economics or sport, they just repeat the press releases.
Good link Cougar
An interesting read
Shame about the click bait title ("I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How.") on an otherwise interesting article.
Scientific method, study types and statistical significance should be taught to everyone.
As always, [url= https://xkcd.com/882/ ]relevant xkcd[/url].
The Mozart effect is a prime example of a dodgy study being poorly reported then picked up and trumpeted by the press. Unfortunately that one was published in Nature though, maybe the editorial staff were just back from the pub...