>From:    ppalsha <[log in to unmask]>
>I'm not trying to argue and start any type of argument, but I'm going to
>add 8 cents into this, to add to the 2 cents that another person threw in.
 
Well, I'll add my 2 cents and maybe we should start collecting all these
cents and send them to SOS or something! :-)
 
>I think Bob is a very smart person who is trying to prove his case,
>but is going about it the wrong way.  Almost all the time, researches
>do not tell any one about their case, until it is all concluded.
 
This is only true to a certain point.  Most of the time, research is
shared with colleagues along the way in the form of talks, posters, and
papers.  The phrase "publish or perish" isn't just fluff.  Believe me,
if you get a 5 year grant from NIH and you are scheduled for a review of
your progress midway, and you don't publish anything substantial after
the first year or two, you probably aren't going to get the rest of the
money unless you can come up with a really convincing reason why you
haven't produced any results that people can look at.  "I don't want
to publish until all my research is finished" just won't fly.  You
may not give away everything, if you are working on something really
revolutionary, because you don't want to give others the chance to
"scoop" you, but you sure don't wait until you are completely done before
sharing at least some of the information.  People in academic science who
don't share their results are looked on with quite a bit of suspicion and
dislike.  Besides, in science you are never really "all concluded".
Every answer to a question tends to generate 10 more questions that need
answering.
 
>- That's the big question you have to ask yourself.."What if?"  What
>if your wrong though?  You have all this research you process your
>information on, but the background of it all has lots of question
>to that my eyebrow shuns up to.  It's seems like it's just "you"
>manipulating the hard work of other researchers, and taking their
>work for credit.
 
That's a bit low.  I haven't seen anything to suggest that Bob is trying
to take credit for other people's research.  If I tell you that lack
of Vitamin C can cause scurvy, am I taking credit for other people's
research?  Do I need to go and do the research all over again just to
make sure that lack of Vitamin C really does cause scurvy?  I don't
think so.
 
>As you also stated..
>>If people REALLY CARED about ferrets, I mean really, honestly cared,
>>when why don't they listen to the argument BEFORE they start shooting
>>it down?"
>- Does that mean if I'm too lazy to counteract an argument from you, that
>you win your case of DR?
 
No, and nobody (especially Bob) would suggest that Bob automatically
"wins".  He's not saying you HAVE TO counteract his argument.  He's
saying that if you have an open mind, you will listen to and carefully
consider the argument before making up your mind, and especially before
you dismiss it out of hand.  And if you do want to counteract the
argument, you need to have some thought put into your point of view, and
use reason, not emotion (Linda Iroff comes to mind as someone who can
debate without making it personal).  You can't just shoot it down because
you don't like it (well, you can, but your "argument" in that case will
lack any kind of integrity).
 
>Or are you just mad that some of "us" don't agree with what you are
>stating?  If you supply me with your credential's on your studies and
>"your" research (not others), then I might be able to say, "Hey, this
>guy might be onto something."
 
One of the main arguments of people who are against using animals in
research is that "the research has already been done multiple times,
and it has shown the same thing time and again.  It doesn't need to
be unnecessarily repeated".  I'm not against using animals in research
but there is a point here.  If similar research done by independent
researchers in several species shows basically the same thing, there is
no need for Bob or anyone else to repeat *exactly* the same thing.  In
fact, those who review grant proposals these days really don't want to
see your proposal come in saying you want to demonstrate that the lack
of Vitamin C causes scurvy.  They are going to think you're nuts.  They
want something that is a bit novel and will advance knowledge, and you
had better justify why you think your hypothesis is novel and will
advance knowledge, and give some background data, and guess what?  That
background data can and should come from you, but also it is perfectly
acceptable, and expected, that you will provide some backup for your
hypothesis from the existing literature, which means quoting OTHER
RESEARCH.  (In fact, some reviewers get a bit miffed if you don't quote
*their* research in your grants or papers, but that's another topic. ;-)
 
>I'm defiantly going to get some angry people on those responses, but I
>just felt I needed to state what I feel.  I did a research on dogs and
>people with lymphomia, and the research went on(to complex to explain).
>But, I did take some work of other researchers, and quoted them, and
>boy did my case get shut down.  If your trying to build up a case, do it
>yourself.  Just a word of advice to make your research more crediable
>and believeable.
 
I suspect it wasn't just the fact of you referencing the work of other
researchers, it was how and why you did it.  Nobody works in a vacuum.
Everyone in science stands on the shoulders of the ones who have come
before them.  Otherwise, science would never get anywhere at all.
 
For myself, I tend to think that the evidence thus far supports that
DR/CR would probably result in the same or similar results in ferrets
as it has in the many other species studied thus far.  Whether we as
individuals want to try and maintain our ferrets on such a diet is
totally UP TO US, and no one is really going to condemn anyone who
doesn't feel up to the task.  It is not an easy thing to do.  In fact,
if you don't do it correctly, you could do more harm than good, so it's
important to only attempt it (for yourself, or your family, or your pets)
if you can do so competently.  Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with
sticking with the current best diets we have.
 
Best regards,
Karen
[Posted in FML issue 3970]