ArticleDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society2014
Correcting systemic deficiencies in our scientific infrastructure.
Article in Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientific method is inherently self-correcting. When different hypotheses are proposed, their study would result in the rejection of the invalid ones. If the study of a competing hypothesis is prevented because of the faith in an unverified one, scientific progress is stalled. This has happened in the study of low dose radiation. Though radiation hormesis was hypothesized to reduce cancers in 1980, it could not be studied in humans because of the faith in the unverified linear no-threshold model hypothesis, likely resulting in over 15 million preventable cancer deaths worldwide during the past two decades, since evidence has accumulated supporting the validity of the phenomenon of radiation hormesis. Since our society has been guided by scientific advisory committees that ostensibly follow the scientific method, the long duration of such large casualties is indicative of systemic deficiencies in the infrastructure that has evolved in our society for the application of science. Some of these deficiencies have been identified in a few elements of the scientific infrastructure, and remedial steps suggested. Identifying and correcting such deficiencies may prevent similar tolls in the future.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.