|
    Check it Out!    
|
|
RideCamp@endurance.net
Re: Re: Darolyn and Barefootin' (extremely long)
them after their already dead, and do not slaughter. For this reason,
I
don't think a rendering plant is a good place to go looking at horse
feet.
I agree.
anecdotal reports from
decades to centuries old. IMO there is no way to
classify this as
research, which is why I used quotes around the term. IMO
the author
of the article appeared to be taking liberties with the term
research.
I agree that the hypotheses is a pretty weak one if
they can't come up with data less than 200 years old. As a researcher, I'd
just prefer not being painted with the same brush. :-)
was just
trying
to point out that if it is not a carefully controlled study with a
strong
methodology and with peer review as a part of the process, it isn't
necessarily science, no matter how many initials someone has after their
name. Sorry if I offended you, you are the goddess of equine science
and
nutrition and I humbly bow before you. jeer
God lord, you didn't offend me. I agree that
if it isn't a controlled study in *some* fashion, it doesn't hold much
water. Along the same lines, there was a comment from a veterinarian from
back east that I read had made the comment that the lack of contradicting data
further supports Dr. Strasser's views (and BTW, Dr. S is a veterinarian, but
that doesn't make her trained in scientific methodology---that's an entirely
different degree). It is NOT true that lack of data supports a
theory---that's like saying that because I have no data contradicting my
statement that I am Madonna's long lost sister, my statement must be true.
It just don't work that way.
Don't worry, jeri, I think we're both on the same
wavelength, just cringed a wee bit at a suggestion that all research is
skewed. Most of us are pretty straight.:-)
Susan G
|
    Check it Out!    
|
|
Home
Events
Groups
Rider Directory
Market
RideCamp
Stuff
Back to TOC