Uploaded December 2014 | Updated September 2026, 2 hours ago
For best viewing experience, please download the following .pdf files of the studies discussed in Dr. Cmar's talk:
files.ncas.org/2014-12-02/NCAS-mefloquine-HIV-plos-2014.pdf
files.ncas.org/2014-12-02/NCAS-homeopathy-PMS-2014.pdf
One of the most important aspects of being a healthy skeptic is knowing that just because a scientific study was done on a topic does not mean the study was done well, or that the conclusion the authors reach is supported by what they actually did. But when someone states that a particular study has major flaws or was well-done, what precisely does that mean?
In this video, Dr. John Cmar analyzes two different journal articles in detail, focusing on the good, the bad, and the ugly of how studies are done and interpreted.
John Cmar, MD, has been long enthralled with horrible infections that could spell doom for humankind, as well as sanity and skepticism in the practice of medicine. He is currently an Instructor of Medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and the Assistant Director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Sinai Hospital of Baltimore. He is the lead physician in Sinai's Ryan White initiative, which provides medical care and social assistance to patients with HIV infection who are without medical insurance.
In his role as Program Director for the Internal Medicine residency program at Sinai, he teaches an annual course series in Evidence-Based Medicine, among many other duties.
He also does Infectious Diseases outreach in Baltimore television and print media, and is the guest-in-residence on the monthly Midday on Health show with Dan Rodricks on 88.1 WYPR radio in Baltimore. John is a science fiction and fantasy fan, avid gamer, and podcast enthusiast. He currently blogs and podcasts on skeptical, medical, and geeky topics as Saint Nickanuck of the Tundra at johncmar.com
Views expressed in this video are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Capital Area Skeptics (NCAS).
For best viewing experience, please download the following .pdf files of the studies discussed in Dr. Cmar's talk:
files.ncas.org/2014-12-02/NCAS-mefloquine-HIV-plos-2014.pdf
files.ncas.org/2014-12-02/NCAS-homeopathy-PMS-2014.pdf
One of the most important aspects of being a healthy skeptic is knowing that just because a scientific study was done on a topic does not mean the study was done well, or that the conclusion the authors reach is supported by what they actually did. But when someone states that a particular study has major flaws or was well-done, what precisely does that mean?
In this video, Dr. John Cmar analyzes two different journal articles in detail, focusing on the good, the bad, and the ugly of how studies are done and interpreted.
John Cmar, MD, has been long enthralled with horrible infections that could spell doom for humankind, as well as sanity and skepticism in the practice of medicine. He is currently an Instructor of Medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, and the Assistant Director of the Division of Infectious Diseases at Sinai Hospital of Baltimore. He is the lead physician in Sinai's Ryan White initiative, which provides medical care and social assistance to patients with HIV infection who are without medical insurance.
In his role as Program Director for the Internal Medicine residency program at Sinai, he teaches an annual course series in Evidence-Based Medicine, among many other duties.
He also does Infectious Diseases outreach in Baltimore television and print media, and is the guest-in-residence on the monthly Midday on Health show with Dan Rodricks on 88.1 WYPR radio in Baltimore. John is a science fiction and fantasy fan, avid gamer, and podcast enthusiast. He currently blogs and podcasts on skeptical, medical, and geeky topics as Saint Nickanuck of the Tundra at johncmar.com
Views expressed in this video are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Capital Area Skeptics (NCAS).
