tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post7933286178127429058..comments2018-01-03T07:02:32.059-05:00Comments on Institutional Review Blog: Bell and Salmon Warn of Dangerous AssumptionsZachary M. Schraghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-59289115520413781912013-01-14T12:35:38.297-05:002013-01-14T12:35:38.297-05:00Thanks for this comment. I fail to see how it resp...Thanks for this comment. I fail to see how it responds to Bell and Salmon's suggestion that RECs read relevant scholarly literature before restricting research.Zachary M. Schraghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-58391919569890216212013-01-14T10:57:32.121-05:002013-01-14T10:57:32.121-05:00Sensible risk analysis and response are easier to ...Sensible risk analysis and response are easier to discuss than accomplish. For one, in general, people are really bad at gauging risks. Lots of people shove their children into cars every day without much thought but will worry about the risk of child abduction. Secondly, risks are the language of persuasion. Many risks are highly politicized. Health care? Lots of screening tests are marketed using fear, but many of the tests aren't very good and the the risk of unnecessary distress and treatment often out-weigh the purported benefits. FUD is everywhere. And third, the response to risk always involves a trade-off but people are much happier living in the fantasy land of "no risk". Either they deny the risk or no risk is too small. <br /><br />This blog itself, although it makes some good points, hardly passes for a sober, evidence-based analysis of the IRB-related risks to research. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Alannoreply@blogger.com