As i understand it, Fleming had been doing the research that prepared
him to recognize the effect of the penicillium mold for 20 years.
From the perspective of cognitive psychology, that is no accident.
Jim
James M. Walker, MD, FACP
Chief Medical Information Officer
Geisinger Health System
The best way to predict the future is to invent it.
- Alan Kay
>>> Ash Paul 11/07/10 12:07 AM >>>
Dear Ben,
The discovery of Penicillin by Alexander Fleming was purely by accident.
William
Roentgen also accidentally discovered X-rays. You can read about the 100
greatest discoveries in medicine at Discovery Channel's website:
http://science.discovery.com/convergence/100discoveries/big100/medicine.html
In Observational Research, Randomised Trials, and Two Views of Medical
Science, Prof J P Vandenbroucke from Leiden, Netherlands, writes about
how he
unwittingly unravelled the aetiology of a disease: the detection of the
interaction between factor V Leiden and oral contraceptives in causing
venous thrombosis
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050067
If you have the time, you can read a very good 2006 essay on anecdotal
evidence
at:
“Anecdotal Evidence”: Why Narratives Matter to Medical Practice
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0030423
The ScienceBasedMedicine Blog had a very good article on anecdotal
medicine in
2008:
The Role of Anecdotes in Science-Based Medicine
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=33
Regards,
Ash
Dr Ash Paul
Medical Director
NHS Bedfordshire
21 Kimbolton Road
Bedford
MK40 2AW
Tel no: 01234897224
Email: [log in to unmask]
________________________________
From: "Djulbegovic, Benjamin"
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sun, 7 November, 2010 6:32:54
Subject: Re: Great Anecdotes versus poor science
Indeed- I think the same has been said of Gallileo who apparently
disregarded
the experimental observations to fit his theory, which stood the test of
time...While there is a logic or method related to justification of
scientific
claims, unfortunately there is no one of scientific discovery...we
simply don't
know how and why the "bulb goes off" in our brains and why people stick
to some
claims and not to others...
one of the reasons for this is that , as a historian of science Steven
Shapin
put it in his recent book "Never Pure"-science has never been pure as it
is
"produced by people with bodies, situated in time, space, culture, and
society,
and struggling for credibilty and authority"...and humans do have their
limits...
best
ben djulbegovic
-----Original Message-----
From: Evidence based health (EBH)
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Stephen Senn
Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2010 1:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Great Anecdotes versus poor science
Things are not always so simple. Badly conducted research sometimes
reaches the
right conclusion, if I may be permitted an autoquote this is what I
recently
wrote in defence of the point of view that climategate has little
bearing on
what we should believe about global warming
"It has been claimed that Claudius Ptolemy, the greatest astronomer of
antiquity
and Gregor Mendel, the father of genetics falsified their data. I don't
think
that we need to know whether this is correct or not to judge their
theories. As
it happens, Noel Swerdlow mounted a robust defence of Ptolemy against
the
charges brought by Robert Newton whereas in Mendel's case I don't think
anybody
has argued with RA Fisher's (respectful) case that the data look highly
suspect.
But Mendel's theory looks currently much better than Ptolemy's. "
Regards
Stephen Senn
________________________________________
From: Evidence based health (EBH) [[log in to unmask]]
On
Behalf Of SUBSCRIBE EVIDENCE-BASED-HEALTH Tom Smith
[inquiry12345@GMAIOf course when new discoveries are made, great observations, by great
scientists
are often dismissed as invalid because someone did a bad study which
trumps
someones observations.
Does anyone have a historically good example of this, or a list of
examples.
IMPORTANT WARNING: The information in this message (and the documents attached to it, if any) is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken, or omitted to be taken, in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please delete all electronic copies of this message (and the documents attached to it, if any), destroy any hard copies you may have created and notify me immediately by replying to this email. Thank you.
|