It seems today that everything we do is based on research - our dietary decisions, our medical or health decisions, even the decisions about what we put on our skin is based on research. In fact, it seems research runs our lives. But what if that research is wrong?

There are so many holes in research today, that more and more experts are questioning the validity of most (yes, most) research, using terms such as "Not always trustworthy," "dangerous" and "expensive mistakes."

Dr. John P.A. Ioannidis, chief of Stanford University's Prevention Research Center says that "people are being hurt and even dying" because of false medical claims. He says these claims are not quackery, but errors in medical research. His claim that 90% of all research done today is wrong, have many in the medical establishment concerned.

He states that most biomedical studies are wrong and is causing health decisions to be made that may actually be harmful to patients. He cites new research denouncing claims such as statin drugs (used to reduce cholesterol) are actually effective in people with no history of heart disease, and states that genetics biomedical research is riddled with incorrect findings, including finding genomes that couldn't even be verified.

To understand why research is so riddled with holes, we have to understand the basis of most research.

First of all, most research has a bias. A company will only spend the millions of dollars (in some cases billions of dollars) on a research product to prove that their product is effective. Dr. Ioannidis, as well as other research physicians are concerned because they say they will keep at the research, tweaking things until they get the desired result. They manipulate the control group and circumstances until they get positive results.

For example, a study on milk and weight loss had requirements that you had to drink a six pack of soda per day to qualify for the milk study, and that you had to replace your soda with milk. So, did the weight loss occur because you stopped the soda, or because you drank the milk? To honestly assess research, you have to know ALL the parameters of the study.

You also have to know what they used in the study. For example, the early studies on Vitamin E and its prevention and treatment of heart disease was done using wheat germ oil, later studies used just a fractional component (d-alpha tocopherol). It's like comparing an egg to a golf ball. They are not the same. One is food, the other is chemical. The results were completely opposite.

Another similar study using the synthetic form of Vitamin A, Beta Carotene, had similar confusing results. Knowing what they are using in the studies makes all the difference. But who reads that? The companies count on you to not read the full research.

There are many discrepancies in research. They, as well as more details about the Vitamin A and E research will be discussed more in Part II of this article.

Dr. Holly Carling is a Doctor of Oriental Medicine, Licensed Acupuncturist, Doctor of Naturopathy, Clinical Nutritionist and Master Herbologist with over 32 years of experience. Dr. Carling is currently accepting new patients and offers natural health care services and whole food nutritional supplements in her Coeur d'Alene clinic. Visit Dr. Carling's website at www.vitalhealthandfitness.com to learn more about Dr. Carling, view a list of upcoming health classes and read other informative articles. Dr. Carling can be reached at 208-765-1994 and would be happy to answer any questions regarding this topic.

• This is a paid advertisement.