Forum menu
Cougar thanks, they don't work apparently (although I would have like some numbers).
However do we ask manufacturers to provide proof of their claim when they claim things such as:
new fork is stiffer
new brakes are twice as powefull
DWLink work
or new coating reduce friction by 90%
😉
I think we don't, which in my opinion raises a question why are we so trustful in some case and not in others.
N.B. I am not in any case saying you should buy a PB one more time. Just say that just saying that there is no proof they work is not a valid scientific point. After all there is no proof off plenty of things we take for granted (mostly quantum science). The experiment described by cougar at least is a first step in the way that it shows that the power balance have no effect. It would be interested to see if they can get a peer reviewed article based on that short test to be honest.
However do we ask manufacturers to provide proof of their claim when they claim things such as:
new fork is stiffer
new brakes are twice as powefull
DWLink work
or new coating reduce friction by 90%
Yes!
Just say that just saying that there is no proof they work is not a valid scientific point.
Umm yes it is actually. I thought you were a scientist?
The southern yeti are you sure? Can you send me a link where there is actually some scientific method validation about claims that new coating is better than old one?
Toys I think you need to get a good LR on peer-reviewed article. Plenty of postulate and assumption in them, with no proof as that.
Toys I think you need to get a good LR on peer-reviewed article. Plenty of postulate and assumption in them, with no proof as that.
LR?
Indeed plenty of postulate and assumption, and no proof, so all the readers can take the meaning from that, just because it's been published does not make it fact. I've written plenty of papers with theory only, it's an important part of the scientific method for lots of reasons.
What field do you work in?
Red bikes are faster though.
Now that is scientific fact — there's no real evidence for it — but it is scientific fact.
Red bikes are faster though.
Now that is scientific fact — there's no real evidence for it — but it is scientific fact.
It's been proven by thousands if not millions of observations since redness was invented.
Comp chem.
Ian you wrong... Everyone know that a five coloured stripe bike is faster 😉
It's been proven by thousands if not millions of observations since redness was invented.
yeah but no, as atherton's bikes are blue 😉 and absalon's ones are blue or white with stripe 😉
I haven't got a link, no. But the stiffness of a set of forks etc is certainly something that can be tested, using that science hoodoo.
Damn you for sucking me into your Troll!
I fail to see why you're having such a difficult time in accepting that something that someone made up, was made up. Are you Fox Mulder? There's having an open mind, and then there's having a commonsensectomy.
Stiffer forks, braking forces etc, are all very easy to measure. These aren't ephemeral, difficult to verify claims. You're absolutely right that we shouldn't necessarily believe everything we're told though; some industries are practically built on feeding us horsecrap.
For instance. If washing powder manufacturers really did get my whites whiter than their previous powder did every time they claimed to have done so, they'd be visible from Alpha Centauri by now. Global warming wouldn't be attributed to pollution, they'd be blaming the glow from my pants.
The cosmetics industry lies to use constantly precisely because their claims are hard to test. I've been using this moisturiser for 20 years because it claims to keep me young looking. Has it worked? There's no baseline, how would I know?
Yoghurt's got in on the act now too; put a spoonful of the stuff into a little bottle, mix a bit of milk in, claim it contains "Digestivum" (I refer you back to my earlier comment about making stuff up), give it a name that sounds like a Klingon swearword and market it to the depressingly gullible at a quid a bottle.
Homeopathy. End of sentence.
So, yes. Your question is valid, but your conclusion is wrong. We accept what we're told far too readily, but the solution isn't to blindly give credence to any old dog egg peddler that happens by, it's to question whether or not we're being conned by immoral crooks.
And to be honest, a peer review of PB bands would frankly be a waste of scientists.
Let me see if I can make this clear. And I'll type it slowly so it's easy to understand.
There is no evidence, no reason, no logic, nothing at all, to suggest that PB bands do anything at all. The only reason we're having this conversation is because someone in Marketing for their company made it up. They've now [i]admitted [/i]this. There is nothing to test.
Sorry, define "doesn't work"?
I'll crop some of what I posted somewhere else:
Lets break this down into a theoretical example:If I manufactured and sold a hologram wristband (Faithband TM)that I claimed could improve your performance, and carried out a double blind test on it versus a wristband without a hologram, what you would almost certainly see is no difference whatsoever between the two groups test results, however, at the same time, if you compared this with a control group who were not given a wristband, you almost certainly would see a statistically significant number of those wearing either of the bands having an improvement in performance over the control group, this, as I'm sure you all know, is due to the placebo effect.
Now, if 30% of the test group improved their performance over the control group, (and this would not be an unrealistic figure) then like it or not, the Faithband is an effective aid to training in 1/3 of cases - all the improvement is admittedly only because of the placebo effect, but you cannot dismiss the fact that placebo is a very complex and highly effective psychological tool, that is not really fully understood by science...
So, in brief, I'd suggest that while the whole hologram bunkum science hype underwriting the powerband is clearly balls, that does not undermine the fact that we could well see a significant improvement in performance from a wearer, due to placebo effect (and perhaps without the sales bullsh... they would not receive the same benefit) This doesn't make them idiots, gullible, fools or worthy of derision, it makes them human beings, who are subject to a known psychological phenonemon that science does not fully understand.
My question to you all would be this - even if it is down to the placebo effect, what really is so wrong with that? The band may still deliver a tangible, measurable and provable benefit. If the benefit is real and quantifiable, then thats all that matters!
Welcome to the world of the human mind - its an amazing organ, and if someone is willing to pay £30 in the belief that it will improve their performance, then it just might be the best £30 they've ever spent...
In the latest MBUK the guy who writes the freeride column (Chris?) says he is using one and it makes a difference....
Sponsored maybe?
This is true as well. I am wondering why no-one have done that to be honest. All you need a a few PB, and people volunteering. Then you can test the PB against a placebo and and do your stats. You'll indeed need two test, a blind and a double blind to validate... I am curious how much money it can cost to be fair.
Juan, with respect, double blind doesn't test whether powerband would improve performance, only whether you'd improve performance over placebo... Now, if you could introduce a pure control to the equation, then you'd have a more accurate reflection of the efficacy - clearly this would be difficult due to the fact that you cannot put a band on people without them noticing, and even if you do that, its hard to exclude the possibility of Hawthorne effect on those who know they're being tested...
commonsensexctomy - lol
In science if you make a theory then you need to provide proof. If you do not have proof then you have a hypothesis which is open to debate but is not a "fact" or taken as such.
I agree that absence of proof is not proof of absence but the default position of most scientists should be sceptical but open minded. They may work and I'll believe they do, but only when someone proves it to me.
define "doesn't work"?
Sorry, my bad. "Doesn't work beyond placebo."
I take your point, however "should we be endorsing placebo medicine" is a whole other topic of conversation. "Should we allow people to be openly deceived by private companies" is more the angle I'm coming from.
Cougar, but would you accept that the normal "endorsing placebo medicine" arguments would not apply, we're talking about improving the performance of a healthy subject, not failing to improve the prognosis of an ill subject.
In addition, there may be an important element of self selection here, which would make a belief in the (pseudo) science a vital part of the (placebo caused) performance improvement... so, if you believe its going to work, its more likely to do so - and this is where we get into the difficult subject of "deceiving people" - if you say its going to work, and it does work (and you can actually quantify a measurable and supportable performance improvement, even if it is entirely placebo) then are you actually deceiving anyone?
And I'll type it slowly so it's easy to understand.
Very LOL
Sorry, I worry sometimes that I'm too subtle. (-:
In science if you make a theory then you need to provide proof. If you do not have proof then you have a hypothesis which is open to debate but is not a "fact" or taken as such.I agree that absence of proof is not proof of absence but the default position of most scientists should be sceptical but open minded. They may work and I'll believe they do, but only when someone proves it to me.
[url= http://www.bmj.com/content/327/7429/1459.abstract ]Juan, have you ever heard of this paper that proposes a randomised control trial to test the efficacy of parachutes?[/url]
That's genius.
Cougar - Member
"Should we allow people to be openly deceived by private companies" is the angle I'm coming from.
'we have a duty to point and laugh loudly at people being stupid' - is the angle i'm coming from...
Heh, no arguments here.
cycleworlduk - Member
just signed upto be the local stockist and wondered if any of the collective had used em....
we've had a bit of interest so far.
Posted 1 month ago
Tut tut tut.
DT78 - Member
In the latest MBUK the guy who writes the freeride column (Chris?) says he is using one and it makes a difference....
And then we're expected to believe their bike tests...
Cougar
Homeopathy. End of sentence.
Ohh lets start this, I need to do some more moron baiting now that this thread has died.
I like the parachute test 😀
Can we not so randomise the ones jumping with no parachute? I indeed will choose the bias 😈
Toys19 in my field on of the big assumption is that the experiment is always true 😯
They may work and I'll believe they do, but only when someone proves it to me.
Well I would love to look into it. Just taking the tests they perform on the website, make sure it can be done using machinery and then having some guinea pigs to perform the tests.
Toys19 in my field on of the big assumption is that the experiment is always true
That proves nothing of what you spoke of previously, you have to make an assumption to make a test. If you didnt make an assumption you wouldn't need to do the research.
I've only scanned the thread to see the number of naysayers on here doubting the power of the band and I'd just want to add I BELEIVE!
Magnets are great things, I spent a not inconsiderable amount of money on a magnet that fits around the fuel line in my car aligning the diesel molecules as they pass and that gives my car more power and balance too ;o)
You slipped up there. You could have wrapped a powerband around the exhaust and increased the car's balance and power whilst aligning its chi and repelling blue Volvos(*).
(* - note, Powerband does not work on blue Volvos)
(also, there's no magnets in Power Balance bands, otherwise it'd at least be based in old quackery rather than new quackery)
Can we put astrology here as well?
With joy in my heart and a spring in my step.