Looking back on it now, I guess what I really learned in graduate school was that you can't trust research. You really can't. There's so much variation in methods and methodology -- and so little true objectivity -- that essentially we can and do interpret data to mean anything we'd like it to mean.
This has lots to do with relying on correlations, i.e. the patients who had the most X factor also developed the most Y condition. But this does not prove that X causes Y. No way, baby. Remember that historical study showing that the regions of the world with the most storks also had the most births? Yeah, right.
Being an inquisitive person with diabetes following the latest research, I try not to get too disillusioned. I know the scientists are making progress. They are. With all the efforts, and all that funding, they have to be!! But for every study stating milk products cause diabetes, there's another illustrating the health benefits of dairy consumption for diabetics. Wha?!
And now this. Researchers at UCLA recently discovered that tight BG control isn't necessarily beneficial! Diabetics they studied with poor glucose control actually had a 35 percent lower mortality rate than patients with A1C levels no greater than 7. Wha?!
OK, maybe it's a fluke, but awfully disconcerting following the latest DCCT results showing that tight glucose control supposedly makes a huge difference in long-term health.
I guess you just can't trust research. Geez. And as if it weren't dicey enough, some people have to go and just outright cheat. They're saying Dr. Hwang's indiscretions in faking stem cell research will "set the already embattled field back indefinitely." I'll say.