Dismissing manufactured uncertainties, limitations and competing interpretations about chemical exposures and diabetes

Issues with data and analyses: Errors, underlying themes, and potential solutions

“…These arguments might focus on characteristics of the authors, the caliber of a journal, or the prestige of authors' institutions to bolster the strength of or refute a study. In one example of ad hominem reasoning, an author was disparagingly identified only as a "chemical industry consultant with a competing interest" to passively dismiss arguments, while they also reasoned from authority and reputation by negatively contrasting the arguments of the other authors with "independent scientific entities" (38). Authority and reputation may serve as useful heuristics for making daily decisions; using them to support or refute the quality of the evidence in published papers is tangential to science.…”

“…However, in trying to counter the points of some authors or studies, some individuals resort to ad hominem arguments, often trying to undermine the credibility of arguments by attacking a person based on perceived expertise (85) or presumed motives, focusing especially on funding sources (86). These attacks (38) are not new (87), and remain distractions from the science itself. In our opinions, and in the opinions of some scientific societies, such attacks on fellow scientists on nonscientific grounds are unethical (Examples of Societies and Associations Denouncing Ad Hominem Attacks).…”