What You Should Know About Research
The purpose of this article is to help readers understand research methods and to uncover some myths and misunderstandings. While searching literature, you may find that some research papers, published in scientific or other magazines, discourage people from using Aloe Vera. They may state something like "...we have found that Aloe Vera juice does not improve..."
On the other hand, you may run into the opposite conclusion in another paper, where Aloe Vera is glorified as a miraculous, all-mighty drink which cures everything, and they support the conclusion by their experimental work, similar to the first group.
I am usually suspicious if I read either one of those two types of articles. Simply, a reader must understand all the aspects of the particular research, and think out of the box. Now, let's talk about reading that "fine print".
How is (or should be) research done?
Usually, a researcher or a team, specializing in one particular area, after finishing the research, submits the findings to a journal. If the editor finds it suitable, he or she sends the paper for a "peer review" where other scientists, working in the same field, scrutinize the methods and results, basically, the whole research work. They may even get the paper without knowing who did the research, so that they can make unbiased judgment of the work. Being in the same field, they also know if the work is genuine. If the reviewer finds the paper valuable, genuine and worth publishing, i.e. "peer review" is positive, the editor decides to publish it.
Two common misrepresentations
With thousands papers published in every area of science every year, it is hard to "separate the wheat from the chaff". First misrepresentation is using a paper, published research, to make false statement, mostly for marketing purposes. For example, a research team finds that Compound A helps people with psoriasis, and report that certain number of patients finished the trial almost cured. They don't state that Compound A is the "cure", they just make the conclusion that "it may help some patients" and they put their disclaimer in the paper. But the paper gets in hands of a guy who is interested in selling the Compound A, so he takes only one segment of the paper and puts it in his brochures. People don't question those findings, although the original author was far from making such a bold statement.
There are hundreds of supplements and other products which are supported by "clinical" trials, but when I take a look at the numbers, and a little bit of research into it, I discover that the group was made up of 20-30, or maybe even 150 volunteers. How can I trust such a product?
Clinical trials – they are conducted by governments, universities, hospitals, industry, to asses safety of a medication or a device. Volunteers undergo treatments, results are compiled and interpreted, conclusions are drawn and the potential product is given + or -. Clinical trials must be carried out with a placebo, or blind group, to be considered valid. Another aspect is the number of volunteers, their structure, medical conditions etc.
