- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: RFK Jr.'s MAHA report cited nonexistent studies
Posted on 5/30/25 at 9:25 pm to Hateradedrink
Posted on 5/30/25 at 9:25 pm to Hateradedrink
Sup fig?
1
Posted on 5/30/25 at 9:38 pm to LSUTANGERINE
“ABC News has confirmed…”
Posted on 5/30/25 at 9:41 pm to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
"I was surprised to see what seems to be an error in the citation of my work in the report, and it does make me concerned given that citation practices are an important part of conducting and reporting rigorous science," Keyes wrote to ABC News in an email. Keyes is cited in a paper titled "Changes in mental health and substance use among US adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic," which appears on page 52 of the MAHA report and lists JAMA Pediatrics as the journal. A representative for the journal confirmed to ABC News the paper does not exist. Keyes noted she has done research on the topic cited in the MAHA report, but that she and her listed co-authors did not write the paper cited. "I would be happy to send this information to the MAHA committee to correct the report, although I have not yet received information on where to reach them," she noted.
Is there a paper with the exact title cited? Yes.
Is there a study on adolescents during Covid in JAMA pediatrics vol 7 no. 12? Also yes.
Did the woman cited study adolescents and anxiety during Covid pandemic? Still yes.
“They made up everything! There were typos in the report!”
Posted on 5/30/25 at 10:09 pm to the808bass
Hey man. I know it was tough for you when Gaetz didn’t make it into the admin, but there’s always the next pedo.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 10:15 pm to JohnnyKilroy
I really believe that a law should be passed that anything AI generated should have a mark to let others know that it wasn't human generated. That any person that attempts to pass an AI generated "whatever" can be held liable for defrauding the public.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 2:31 am to rds dc
TRUST THE SCIENCE!!!!!
Anyway.
Yeah I used ai to check something the other day. Called a dr in that field
Ai says blank.
Dr says blank
Re Ai it.
Would not show me the previous answer (wrong. Wrong as frick. Not even close to correct. Very well articulated though) and completely changed its answer.
Moral of the story.
Call the guy who’s done it his whole life and bases his life and credibility on his answer.
Anyway.
Yeah I used ai to check something the other day. Called a dr in that field
Ai says blank.
Dr says blank
Re Ai it.
Would not show me the previous answer (wrong. Wrong as frick. Not even close to correct. Very well articulated though) and completely changed its answer.
Moral of the story.
Call the guy who’s done it his whole life and bases his life and credibility on his answer.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 3:26 am to LSUTANGERINE
So is the report still right despite the citation problems?
Posted on 5/31/25 at 3:41 am to LSUTANGERINE
Shaking my head at all this AI shite,
Posted on 5/31/25 at 3:53 am to LSUTANGERINE
So we’ve swapped from using intentionally incorrect studies to using nonexistent studies?
One of those has a small chance of being correct.
I just threw that last line in there cause it’s true, but I am no fan of either scenario.
One of those has a small chance of being correct.
I just threw that last line in there cause it’s true, but I am no fan of either scenario.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 4:37 am to JohnnyKilroy
quote:
If you use AI for any actual research at this point you are fricking retarded.
Every few months I give it another spin to see how much better it’s gotten and 100% of the time it will cite sources that either don’t exist or the source says something VERY different from what the AI claims it says.
But but AI is gonna take all da jerbs and massive UE, but but our AI oberlawds nose best...
Posted on 5/31/25 at 5:26 am to NashvilleTider
quote:
And I really don’t care if he has missteps as he’s saving us
I support what RFK is trying to do, but it is vital that he get the science right, especially since that is the whole point of his movement.
Posted on 5/31/25 at 5:31 am to RohanGonzales
quote:
So the study has MORE THAN 500 citations listed and ABC scrounged up a couple with issues? sounds like a formatting problem
I’m sure you’d have the same response if this was done under Biden. I appreciate the consistency!
Posted on 5/31/25 at 5:36 am to mwade91383
quote:
Just goes to show what we all knew all along. RFK is not, and never was, a serious person.
That’s ridiculous. People are going to make mistakes. I’’ve made lots of big mistakes in my life, but somehow the things i got right were more influential. If I listed all the things I got wrong they would make this one mistake by RFK look like a spelling error.
George HW Bush had a great line about that when Dan Rather was trying to corner him about whether he was in a meeting when some information had been revealed. Bush said something to the effect, “Dan, remember when you were off the set for a couple of minutes and the video feed just showed your empty chair? Would you want your whole career summarized by that one incident?”
Posted on 5/31/25 at 6:15 am to thejuiceisloose
quote:I doubt it would have been reported. Look at what they ignored with that clown.
I’m sure you’d have the same response if this was done under Biden
Posted on 5/31/25 at 6:25 am to LSUTANGERINE
Posted on 5/31/25 at 6:44 am to Penrod
Submitting AI written slop as government policy was not a mistake, it was his best option. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
This is the kind of bullshite you wouldn’t accept from your kid on his book report but somehow from this administration, it’s excusable??
Again, RFK is not a serious person, and it shows!
This is the kind of bullshite you wouldn’t accept from your kid on his book report but somehow from this administration, it’s excusable??
Again, RFK is not a serious person, and it shows!
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 6:58 am
Posted on 5/31/25 at 7:09 am to mwade91383
quote:
Submitting AI written slop as government policy was not a mistake, it was his best option. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
The odds are high that RFK did not know it was “AI slop”.So yes, it WAS a mistake on his part not to vet what was being submitted.
And No, of course it’s not excusable. But I’m not about to throw that very important baby out with the bathwater. RFK, Jr has brought to the fore, at great personal cost, an obvious problem with the US food supply and medical practices.
This post was edited on 5/31/25 at 7:12 am
Posted on 5/31/25 at 7:20 am to LSUTANGERINE
But it started a conversation…….
Posted on 5/31/25 at 7:22 am to TrueTiger
quote:
So is the report still right despite the citation problems?
Please tell me you are being sarcastic.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News