On this blog I have frequently complained about the way-too-small study group sizes used so often in neuroscience studies. This is one of the biggest reasons for doubting the reliability of very many neuroscience studies. Two other equally great problems are the failure to pre-register a single detailed hypothesis and the methods that will be used to analyze and collect data before starting an experiment (the "fishing expedition" problem), and the failure of so many neuroscience experimental studies to declare and follow a detailed blinding protocol to mimimize experimenter bias. The "bare minimum" for a halfway-trustworthy experimental study is 15 subjects per study group, but neuroscience experiments often use fewer than 15 subjects for particular study groups.
A completely different situation now exists in regard to COVID-19 vaccines. The study group size nowadays for a particular vaccine is the total number of people who have taken that vaccine. By now the study group size for each of the approved COVID-19 vaccines is millions of times greater than the way-too-small study group sizes so often used in neuroscience studies. It would seem, therefore, that based on study group sizes you should have high confidence in the reliability of COVID-19 vaccines that have already been used by many millions of people.
I myself have got two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, as have my wife and daughters. I recommend that others do the same. It seemed reasonable to take a "wait and see" attitude when relatively few people had been vaccinated, but as more and more millions of people get vaccinated without a problem, it seems the case for getting a vaccine (at least from a study group size standpoint) is getting stronger and stronger.
No comments:
Post a Comment