Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Think Twice: Even Bad Science Can Get Published!
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Think Twice: Even Bad Science Can Get Published!
Do you have trust issues? We do, too. There is a lot of research out there, both good and bad, and the difference between reliable and not-so-reliable research typically comes down to one thing—study design. Using recent real-world examples, like the first-ever retraction in JAVMA’s 180-year history, join us as we expose the critical differences between well-designed studies and those that fall short.
Related Episodes
Incidence episode: https://bsmpartners.net/barking-mad-podcast/a-mountain-or-a-molehill-what-science-really-says-about-the-incidence-of-dcm
Lit Review episode: https://bsmpartners.net/barking-mad-podcast/pawing-through-the-research-uncovering-the-fatal-flaws-of-DCM
Examples of Poorly Designed Research
More on the JAVMA retraction: https://www.petfoodprocessing.net/articles/18426-unraveling-the-copper-controversy
The Effects of Feeding Pulse-Based, Grain-Free, Diets on Digestibility, Glycemic Response, and Cardiovascular Health In Domestic Dogs: https://harvest.usask.ca/items/a96ed26b-7cb5-4179-8308-20f67e7a9ffa
Development of plasma and whole blood taurine reference ranges and identification of dietary features associated with taurine deficiency and dilated cardiomyopathy in golden retrievers: A prospective, observational study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32413894/ (Check out the Expression of Concern for this one: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7480844/)
Taurine deficiency and dilated cardiomyopathy in golden retrievers fed commercial diets: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209112
Responses in randomised groups of healthy, adult Labrador retrievers fed grain-free diets with high legume inclusion for 30 days display commonalities with dogs with suspected dilated cardiomyopathy: https://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12917-022-03264-x
DCM Research by BSM Partners
Blood parameters research: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpn.13946
Incidence paper: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fanim.2022.846227/full
Board-Invited Literature Review: https://academic.oup.com/jas/article/98/6/skaa155/5857674?login=false
Show Notes
00:00 – Welcome to the Episode
03:22 – Breaking Down the Research Pyramid
09:10 – Considering All the Factors (And Controlling for Them in Research)
10:00 – What is a Literature Review, and Why is it Important?
12:47 – The Peer-Review Process and Fatal Flaws
17:07 – The FDA’s Announcement: Biased Questions Led to Biased Answers
20:46 – FDA Saves Face in Subsequent Updates
23:18 – What Goes into a Well-Designed Study?
28:20 – Nothing is Impossible, Some Things Are Just Really Hard!
32:16 – Examples of Where Research Fell Flat
35:24 – Blood Parameters don’t Tell All
38:36 – Don’t Demonize Ingredients, Instead Study Nutrients
41:19 – Full Transparency: Potential Limitations in BSM Partners’ Research
44:17 – Conclusion and Farewell
View all episodes
By BSM Partners
5
1010 ratings
Do you have trust issues? We do, too. There is a lot of research out there, both good and bad, and the difference between reliable and not-so-reliable research typically comes down to one thing—study design. Using recent real-world examples, like the first-ever retraction in JAVMA’s 180-year history, join us as we expose the critical differences between well-designed studies and those that fall short.
Related Episodes
Incidence episode: https://bsmpartners.net/barking-mad-podcast/a-mountain-or-a-molehill-what-science-really-says-about-the-incidence-of-dcm
Lit Review episode: https://bsmpartners.net/barking-mad-podcast/pawing-through-the-research-uncovering-the-fatal-flaws-of-DCM
Examples of Poorly Designed Research
More on the JAVMA retraction: https://www.petfoodprocessing.net/articles/18426-unraveling-the-copper-controversy
The Effects of Feeding Pulse-Based, Grain-Free, Diets on Digestibility, Glycemic Response, and Cardiovascular Health In Domestic Dogs: https://harvest.usask.ca/items/a96ed26b-7cb5-4179-8308-20f67e7a9ffa
Development of plasma and whole blood taurine reference ranges and identification of dietary features associated with taurine deficiency and dilated cardiomyopathy in golden retrievers: A prospective, observational study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32413894/ (Check out the Expression of Concern for this one: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7480844/)
Taurine deficiency and dilated cardiomyopathy in golden retrievers fed commercial diets: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0209112
Responses in randomised groups of healthy, adult Labrador retrievers fed grain-free diets with high legume inclusion for 30 days display commonalities with dogs with suspected dilated cardiomyopathy: https://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12917-022-03264-x
DCM Research by BSM Partners
Blood parameters research: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jpn.13946
Incidence paper: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fanim.2022.846227/full
Board-Invited Literature Review: https://academic.oup.com/jas/article/98/6/skaa155/5857674?login=false
Show Notes
00:00 – Welcome to the Episode
03:22 – Breaking Down the Research Pyramid
09:10 – Considering All the Factors (And Controlling for Them in Research)
10:00 – What is a Literature Review, and Why is it Important?
12:47 – The Peer-Review Process and Fatal Flaws
17:07 – The FDA’s Announcement: Biased Questions Led to Biased Answers
20:46 – FDA Saves Face in Subsequent Updates
23:18 – What Goes into a Well-Designed Study?
28:20 – Nothing is Impossible, Some Things Are Just Really Hard!
32:16 – Examples of Where Research Fell Flat
35:24 – Blood Parameters don’t Tell All
38:36 – Don’t Demonize Ingredients, Instead Study Nutrients
41:19 – Full Transparency: Potential Limitations in BSM Partners’ Research
44:17 – Conclusion and Farewell