• PhobosAnomaly@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    Out of sheer interest, is it because the data was discredited or is there an ethics issue that kills a paper once it’s been cited?

    • MartianSands@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      15 days ago

      My understanding is there was little to no actual science in that data.

      To be science, the data would need to be systematic and care would need to be taken to exclude confounding factors. What that unit did doesn’t become science simply because they made notes.

    • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      15 days ago

      We just don’t have much use for data about how frostbite affects people who’ve already been tortured first.