AI systems may be good at storing and retrieving data but cannot tell us much about the accuracy of the data which is always a key element in assessing research. Computers cannot be programmed to exercise judgement. Ask anyone that plays bridge and has experience trying to play computer bridge. Same goes for interpretation of electrocardiograms and many other areas of clinical medicine.
The problems discussed in this very important essay reminds me of the Biblical story found in Genesis 11:1-9 known as The Tower of Bable. Whether one considers this story as apocryphal or as a mythic telling of an historical event, the underlying sentiment pertains. Our scientific enterprise seems to have metastisized beyond reliable bounds, and the confusion engendered by our omnivorous research industrial complex (and the religious scientism motivating this) is leading us into ever more confusion. In this context, perhaps less would be more...?
It is problematic that these two authors would now purport to be experts on journalistic integrity after what we witnessed in the Covid era. There was nothing open about the JAMA Open Network. Instead, as former Editors in Chief the JAMA Open Network, strict editorial narrative control was employed re natural origins, PCR test fallacies and viral spread, lockdowns, masking idiocy, and most importantly vaccine harms and failures.
It seems the main intent of these pharma footmen in their recent article was to sow future seeds of doubt about any upcoming autism studies.
AI systems may be good at storing and retrieving data but cannot tell us much about the accuracy of the data which is always a key element in assessing research. Computers cannot be programmed to exercise judgement. Ask anyone that plays bridge and has experience trying to play computer bridge. Same goes for interpretation of electrocardiograms and many other areas of clinical medicine.
The problems discussed in this very important essay reminds me of the Biblical story found in Genesis 11:1-9 known as The Tower of Bable. Whether one considers this story as apocryphal or as a mythic telling of an historical event, the underlying sentiment pertains. Our scientific enterprise seems to have metastisized beyond reliable bounds, and the confusion engendered by our omnivorous research industrial complex (and the religious scientism motivating this) is leading us into ever more confusion. In this context, perhaps less would be more...?
It is problematic that these two authors would now purport to be experts on journalistic integrity after what we witnessed in the Covid era. There was nothing open about the JAMA Open Network. Instead, as former Editors in Chief the JAMA Open Network, strict editorial narrative control was employed re natural origins, PCR test fallacies and viral spread, lockdowns, masking idiocy, and most importantly vaccine harms and failures.
It seems the main intent of these pharma footmen in their recent article was to sow future seeds of doubt about any upcoming autism studies.