Research on the Internet

This is a spin off from the "?? for non vaccinating parents" thread - don't worry, it's not a thread discussing pro's and con's of vaccinating (like we need another of those )

It's just about this quote here :

linda wrote: Anyway, that is my thoughts on it and I don't really get into this topic but the vitamin K story really got me thinking, more from if that was me, how would I cope with my child's death where I based all my research on the internet. The internet.

In actual fact the internet is a very reputable place to do your research - if you know where to look. I've posted about Google Scholar before but thought I would do so again just in case anyone was interested. www.scholar.google.com is a search engine that only pulls results from scientific journals and books. It's a good way of weeding out the very emotive type of language that you will find when searching on normal Google.

Pub Med is another reputable search engine o Medical Scientific Journals. There are many more if you care to look.

The facts are out there - on the internet. It's just a matter of weeding out the science from the other crap thats out there.

At uni, it was a bit easier as I could get more articles and information for free - some full text articles you have to pay for. Of course, I did use the library a whole heap as well - but the same scientific articles that are in the library as hardcopies - are also on the internet. Textbooks are also very good - but again, the same information can be found online.

Perhaps it could be said that you shouldn't base all your decisions just on what you get from searching on Google - it does tend to bring up sites from both extremes of whatever you are searching rather than sites that have both views side by side to compare.

I'm a vaccinating parent - but I've also done most of my research online about immunisations. It's just that we've come up with different answers So, I can't very well be bagging non-vaccinating parents who have also done most of their research on the internet now can I? (But again, this is not a pro/con vaccing thread)

Anyway, this thread is mostly to inform those that didn't know - there are very reputable scientific search engines out there that you can search on other than Google.

Of course, not all scientific articles are well written nor should they all be taken as fact - but knowing what a good unbiased scientific study should look like is probably a topic for another thread

Yes Google scholar is a lot, lot better to do your research on than plain old Mr. Google!

We were told it was better to use Google Scholar than just normal Google with Uni Assignments.

I wish I knew about Google scholar last year! Might bookmark that anyway

I agree that there is reputable stuff out there, but I would also add the proviso that you do sometimes need some level of (scientific?) knowledge in order to correctly critique and therefore interpret what the articles are saying (e.g. know what is significant in the light of all the other data vs. what is pretty statistics) .

But yes, I agree there is good info out there. The other great source of information is the Cochrane Collaboration which brings together all the research on particular topics and offers a lay summary of the strength, quality and conclusions of the research.

I agree Bizzy and it really depends on what you chose to search as to what information you get. I do wonder to that if you are more inclined to not vaccinate your children then that might make you view and search a little differently.

I must say that it was through Uni this year that I learned about Google Scholar so it was good to know that it was better to go via this than general internet. I also learned with Wiki that anyone can edit info in there and I'm sure they have moderators that monitored it but it sure made me think about using it as a 'source'. Great site though for getting all the stats for the biggest loser!

Emmecat my interpretation is that a "non-vax parent" might search "vacc risks" whereas a pro-vax parent might search "vax benefits" - ok way too simplistic an example but i'm typing one handed The 2 searches would get diff hits, and there may be diffs in which links they'd choose too. Thats my take on Linda's comment anyway.

Personally I have access to a uni library, so search in web of science. As for Wikipedia, I give it no standing as a scientific source, but it sometimes has links to good articles.

T-Rex, totally get what you mean, both in your explanation and the typing one handed thing lol

Mumtooboys- you were probably in the majority the way you described your previous situation so good for you looking into it either way. I'm also most definately not anti-vaxxing but I *am* very pro- choice and investigating for myself as well rather than just blindly accepting what I'm told. That stands for just about everything in my life btw, not just vaxxing lol

Flissty wrote: I agree that there is reputable stuff out there, but I would also add the proviso that you do sometimes need some level of (scientific?) knowledge in order to correctly critique and therefore interpret what the articles are saying (e.g. know what is significant in the light of all the other data vs. what is pretty statistics) .

Definitely agree with this. I have a science degree but can sometimes feel out of my depth reading some papers - I feel a bit "dumb" as I don't have a masters or PhD that would have given me a little bit more experience with the statistics that go hand in hand with studies. I know enough to know that I don't know much! IYKWIM