Why do so many just make stuff up for?

Short rant today.

In the genre that I follow and write about often, one does get increasingly frustrated by misinformation, misquoting, misusing, misunderstanding and outright lies about research. I have commented so many times about people just making stuff up and wishing it was true (the wishful thinking fallacy). Not a day goes by in which I do not come across it.

Its early in the morning and I probably not in good mood, when this press release:
Study proves running barefoot helps optimize technique and reduces risk of injury
turned up in my alerts.

So off I went to see what study that was. It was this study from earlier in the year:
Effects of 12 weeks of barefoot running on foot strike patterns, inversion–eversion and foot rotation in long-distance runners

Can someone please show me where the f that study proved that barefoot running optimized technique? (when all I can see is that it changed the technique; nowhere can I see how that change is better or optimized) and where it proved that it reduces the risk of injury? (it was not even a study on injuries!).

The authors and the University need to be called out for making stuff up. They need to be held accountable for spreading stuff that is just not true. Journalists who parrot the press release with no critical thinking skills need to be called out as well (so far its been picked up on and parroted on 13 news websites).

But they are not alone, remember this and this one (its not the first time that I used this title for a post!)

Can someone explain to me why so many are motivated to just make stuff up for? What are they hoping to achieve?

As always, I go where the evidence takes me until convinced otherwise ….and please stop this nonsense.

Last updated by .

One Response to Why do so many just make stuff up for?

  1. Craig Payne July 8, 2016 at 4:36 am #

    BTW, this was not a bad study (in its methods it was good, but they botched the analysis), it did just not show what the press release claimed it did.

    Even then, there is a problem with the way the study was the analysed. I not even convinced that the study did actually show what they claimed they found in the study(let alone the press release!) as they did a within groups analysis rather than the correct between groups analysis. And they did multiple comparisons and did not do a Bonferroni adjustment of the p value. If they had, none of their results would have been significant.

    Another example of a journal’s peer review process failing (not to mention the monumental failure of he University’s press office!)

    Next.

Leave a Reply