Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


FDSCI 101 Day 8 F 15

No description

Richard Datwyler

on 4 May 2017

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of FDSCI 101 Day 8 F 15

Welcome Back
Test review question 1
In the peer review process which usually does not happen
1) Submitted papers required to be re-written
2) Moderated disputes between parties
3) Repeated experimentation by reviewers
4) A lengthy process time 3-9 months
5) Multiple pages of data accompanying paper.
Test review questions 2
A good definition of a scientific model is
A) a detailed picture with correct scaling
B) a tangible structure representing each element
C) a concise description of the appropriate principles needed for the system
D) an exhaustive description of every possible outcome for a specific system
E) an analogy to a real life scientific study
Today's outline

1. Book keeping (Prepare 2a, test 1)
2. Clicker questions / discussion
3. Group Project

Thoughts on our reading on evaluating claims?

Where have you seen the media 'using' science, or maybe 'misusing/abusing' science

How have you 'evaluated' these 'scientific claims'
In 2004, an international group of researchers modeled the effect of predicted climate change over the next 50 years, and reported that this amount of change might eventually cause 15-37% of a select group of terrestrial species to go extinct.
Where does the information come from?
Are the views of the scientific community accurately portrayed?
Is the scientific community's confidence in the ideas accurately portrayed?
Is a controversy misrepresented or blown out of proportion?
Where can I get more information?
How strong is the evidence?
An unnatural disaster:
• Global warming to kill off 1m species
• Scientists shocked by results of research
• 1 in 10 animals and plants extinct by 2050
Where is the issue, what happened, evaluate.
Where does the Information come from?
Why is this an important question?
Science vs. Media
Are the views accurately portrayed?
Some scientists believe that human-produced carbon dioxide is causing Earth to warm dangerously. This view is supported by some ice core studies. However, skeptics question this opinion, arguing that we lack evidence that the warming is not simply a natural part of the planet's climate fluctuations.
Because scientific ideas are tentative and subject to change, they can't be trusted.
a) True
b) False
This is a normal and healthy part of the process of science. While it's true that all scientific ideas are subject to change if warranted by the evidence, many scientific ideas (e.g., evolutionary theory, foundational ideas in chemistry) are supported by many lines of evidence, are extremely reliable, and are unlikely to change.
Conflict between scientific idea and non-scientific viewpoint
Arguments - creation vs evolution
More information
Check citations
Check date updated.
Fundamental scientific controversy
Core theories - string theory, GUT, TOE
Secondary scientific controversy
Corollaries - why are there vestigial embryonic changes
Conflict over ethicality of methods
Moral questions - Stem cells
Conflict over applications
Use of knowledge - Nuclear physics
Watch out for ulterior motives.
Strength of evidence?
correlation vs causation
sample size
Is the evidence for the hypothesis
multiple lines of evidence
Improve balance, strength, blood flow, energy, decrease pain, and stress, etc. These effects are observed while wearing the balance bands and are manifested immediately after placement of the band.

“…uses holographic technology to resonate with and respond to the natural energy field of the body, and increase sport ability.”
–Power Balance

Chiropractic researchers from RMIT's School of Health Sciences recently (2011) reported the results of an independent, randomized and controlled trial with double blind design. They found no difference in balance between people using a real holographic wristband and those wearing a placebo.[1]

A study at the University of Wisconsin tested the effects of Power Balance bracelets on a group of NCAA athletes. One set of the athletes received the Power Balance bracelet, while the other received a placebo bracelet. The athletes were subjected to tests of flexibility, balance, and strength, after which, the athletes switched bracelets and performed the tests again. The study found that the Power Balance bracelet had no effect, compared to the placebo, on the performance of the athletes. [2]

In December 2010, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) required the Australian distributor of Power Balance to do several things, including making the following statement admitting they "engaged in misleading conduct":
"In our advertising we stated that Power Balance wristbands improved your strength, balance and flexibility. We admit that there is no credible scientific evidence that supports our claims and therefore we engaged in misleading conduct in breach of s52 of the Trade Practices Act 1974. If you feel you have been misled by our promotions, we wish to unreservedly apologize and offer a full refund.” [4]

Based on Reliable and Reproducible evidence found in peer reviewed journals it seems that there is no basis to the claims made from Power Balance bracelets. There may be benefits from other balance type bracelets, although unlikely, but their effects were not studied.

Studies were conducted using double blind, randomized, placebo controlled designs.

Sample size was somewhat limited (only 35-45 participants depending on the study). But in the first study they used established protocols to determine the minimum sample size to get statistically significant results for a moderate effect.

Studies used objective measurements not merely subjective reports of effect.

One study mimicked the same tests that were claimed to show the effectiveness of the bracelets by Power Balance. This demonstrated the lack of reproducibility in the claim.

Basically all credible sources conclude that Power Balance technology has no significant effect on balance, strength, or well-being.
Placebo Effect: Faculty of The University of Texas Arlington claim the following: “Results in this study suggest that those who believe in the power balance band may show improvement in performance while wearing the band…trends in mean differences suggest a placebo effect.” [5]

9 out of 10 Dentist say use Crest.....
It has been found that Plastic bottles 'warmed-up' in a microwave give off BPA particles, which are hazardous to your health.
Immunizations can cause autism.
global warming is rising due to automobile useage.
_________ is good for your heart?
Types of Study Practices

Next Monday
Next Wednesday
Pick a study practice
Start looking at sources

Pull things together and work on poster.
Poster session
exam review
Full transcript