Gordon Ramsey's message...

[Jdsk]

...
For example, the degree of effort expended on trying to make the Goldacre/Spiegelhalter editorial primarily about the single paper it uses a start point rather than a broad discussion of the problems of the field in general is quite astonishing.

There was an attempt to discuss some of the underlying research. I didn't see anything about "primarily".

And critical examination of the underlying research using an evidence-based approach is precisely what Goldacre and Spiegelhalter have taught and written about for many years.

Jonathan

[pjclinch]

...
For example, the degree of effort expended on trying to make the Goldacre/Spiegelhalter editorial primarily about the single paper it uses a start point rather than a broad discussion of the problems of the field in general is quite astonishing.

There was an attempt to discuss some of the underlying research. I didn't see anything about "primarily".

Having been given it as a piece to read on the general issues of the field 853's followup pretty much ignored almost the entirety of the editorial in favour of the contents of the one paper, which was justified because it was the "only link" and the "only research" mentioned.

They have made no attempt to address anything in the editorial beyond the Canadian paper it mentions in passing as a start point.

Not so much failing to see the forest for the trees, as staring very fixedly and deliberately at a single tree and saying there's no forest evident.

And critical examination of the underlying research using an evidence-based approach is precisely what Goldacre and Spiegelhalter have taught and written about for many years.

Indeed, but as you've pointed out yourself on numerous occasions, settling on one paper that happens to say something one likes isn't really a useful way to go about it.

Pete.

[Jdsk]

...

And critical examination of the underlying research using an evidence-based approach is precisely what Goldacre and Spiegelhalter have taught and written about for many years.

Indeed, but as you've pointed out yourself on numerous occasions, settling on one paper that happens to say something one likes isn't really a useful way to go about it.

I have (repeatedly) posted that we should make strenuous efforts to gather all of the relevant evidence before coming to any conclusions.

That's completely different from saying that individual publications shouldn't be studied in detail. That's a crucial step in any evidence-based approach. Necessary but not sufficient.

Jonathan

[pjclinch]

...

And critical examination of the underlying research using an evidence-based approach is precisely what Goldacre and Spiegelhalter have taught and written about for many years.

Indeed, but as you've pointed out yourself on numerous occasions, settling on one paper that happens to say something one likes isn't really a useful way to go about it.

I have (repeatedly) posted that we should make strenuous efforts to gather all of the relevant evidence before coming to any conclusions.

That's completely different from saying that individual publications shouldn't be studied in detail. That's a crucial step in any evidence-based approach. Necessary but not sufficient.

Fair comment.

However, in this case 853 was so busy looking at the one paper they felt the editorial was "based on" they failed to bother addressing the bulk of the editorial, which of course includes numerous points that affect it along with the rest of the field.

It does seem rather odd to concentrate so much on what was used as a start point and neglect where the authors actually went, and certainly doesn't strike me as an open approach to the subject.

Pete.

[disherwood]

I wouldn't listen to anything Gordon Ramsey says.... Not even on a subject that he's supposed to be an expert in like food.... A big fat chap that's clearly not a regular cyclist stars giving advice because he couldn't stay on his bike.... Not for me

[deeferdonk]

I wouldn't listen to anything Gordon Ramsey says.... Not even on a subject that he's supposed to be an expert in like food.... A big fat chap that's clearly not a regular cyclist stars giving advice because he couldn't stay on his bike.... Not for me

He's not a big fat chap, and he is a regular cyclist. He's famously extremely fit and does iron man events.
Not that you need listen to his opinion on anything though.
He is an aggressive and competitive person, which is probably more of a risk factor to him whilst cycling than not wearing a helmet.

[disherwood]

Thanks for the detail..... I still wouldn't listen to anything he says.... He's a fat head with a big mouth

[Psamathe]

If somebody wants me to change my behaviour (eg to start wearing a helmet) or for the law to be changed then it is reasonable for me to ask for detailed reasons and adequate evidence of benefit.

Ramsay have not provided either which makes me wonder why he went public about his accident.

Ian