Re:EPA's proposed new rule would allow it to ignore the best...
by smsm42 on Friday July 13, 2018 @06:31PM
(#17527441)
Why would there be zero studies that study lead and have source data? What happened to those that studied lead - did they destroy their data for some reason? Are the data about lead somehow unique so that, unlike any other data, they can't be published? Did some weird catastrophe occur which erased all data regarding to lead studies, and nobody knows about it? What would be the reason that basic scientific norms would not be preserved in this case? I guess if it happened, we'd need to conduct new studies - and find people who screwed up the old ones and make sure they are not responsible for any new studies ever again, to avoid future screwups.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:EPA's proposed new rule would allow it to ignore the best...
by Retric on Friday July 13, 2018 @08:34PM
(#17528007)
Science is old.
Good luck tracking down data from ~50 year old studies published in 1970. Further, their is little point in replicating old studies so often that's all we got.
Re:EPA's proposed new rule would allow it to ignore the best...
by smsm42 on Wednesday July 18, 2018 @05:47PM
(#17562349)
1970 is not a Stone Age, and civilization didn't collapse since then. Why would it impossible to have data? Also, does it mean if a study in 1970 made a mistake, we're now doomed to carry on with this mistake forever? And if not, how would we discover it if not by trying to replicate/re-analyze data?