Here’s to whistleblowers and tiny testicles

Due to a whistleblower, we are now aware of research that was published in the European Journal of Neurology, but which was never done. It was supposedly carried out at the University of Queensland.

Even more shocking is that it was supposedly clinically based research on Parkinson’s disease with a direct donation apparently from Parkinson’s Australia. There were claims that the new technology under study  (repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation) had the potential to revolutionise the way neurological speech and language disorders are treated. Why does it take a whistle blower for this to emerge?

While just recovering, I noted some new research suggesting that the size of men’s testicles relates to how well they look after infants  – the smaller the testicles the better. The papers have had a field day with it. But really – are we going to get women measuring the size of potential husbands with testiculometers?  And is 55 people in the study really enough to cover all possible variables here? And in which direction does the size/husbandry relationship suggest?– maybe good husbandry shrinks them?

Sometimes I think the research industry needs a form of managed care.

– David Butler
http://www.noigroup.com

All comments invited.

6 Responses to “Here’s to whistleblowers and tiny testicles”

  1. NOI Group

    There were 70 in the study, the measurement of testicular volume was voluntary – 55 volunteered. The study is quite interesting regarding the tradeoff beweeen parenting and mating, however the findings have been reasonably questioned by some commentators. But it’s the managment of findings that I worry about. The press finds the mention of genitals saleable and this is all over the press and I do wonder what some members of the public will do with it.

    I bet there is some concerned fondling of testicles going on at the moment, all on the basis of a small study with a few questions that still nee to be answered. Hey girls -don’t put the wedding off just because he has big balls.

    David

    Reply
  2. Ian Stevens

    i read in Ann Oakleys narrative on her own journey with pain and disability Fracture , it covered the antics of the neurologist Henry Head and pals measuring the responses of pain provocation of his own wedding tackle. Just him and pal recording scientifically the sensory responses to stimulation in some Oxbridge room . No funding , no whistle blowers just some curiosity and a good imagination ..probably be on youtube now via some secret camera and his career would be finished!
    I think medicine/research is embedded in a particularly strange culture (the times we are now in) which relishes personal advancement /competitivenes/greed and is deeply distrustful . Anyone that thinks scientific study is somehow special and is done for altruistic advancement of knowledge must be mad. So much of research that i skim through is completely pointless and aims to serve career advancement more than anything else . Obviously there are exceptions but my daily working life has mainly been influenced by de constructive basic physiological and epidemiology studies . By the way i probably have wee ones but i haven’t much to compare them with !

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Basic HTML is allowed. Your email address will not be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

%d bloggers like this: