Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.

Study "Proves" Parachutes Ineffective

posted by Fnord666 on Sunday December 23 2018, @03:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the Science-Interpretation-Guide dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

https://www.bmj.com/content/363/bmj.k5094

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/12/22/679083038/researchers-show-parachutes-dont-work-but-there-s-a-catch

A study has been done, and the surprising result is that parachutes are no more effective than a backpack in preventing injuries when jumping out of an airplane.

It's "common sense" that parachutes work, so it has been a neglected field of science. This surprising and counter-intuitive result is an excellent example of the importance of doing science.

... or maybe it's a perfect example of how top-line study headlines can be mis-representative, especially when portrayed by the mass-media, and how understanding study scope and methodology is important.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Study "Proves" Parachutes Ineffective | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 68 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23 2018, @05:04PM (6 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23 2018, @05:04PM (#777856)

    Click the link, read, and enjoy a laugh - or at least a chuckle.

    Thanks, but no thanks. I'll read the follow-up story where these same researchers are given a choice to jump out of a plane with a parachute or just a backpack. I bet they all choose a parachute.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   0  
       Insightful=2, Overrated=2, Total=4
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Total Score:   0  

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by sjames on Sunday December 23 2018, @06:21PM (1 child)

    by sjames (2882) on Sunday December 23 2018, @06:21PM (#777873) Journal

    No, really, read it. It's obviously not what you think it is.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23 2018, @09:48PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23 2018, @09:48PM (#777913)

      Stop ruining my judgmental outrage!

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23 2018, @09:30PM (3 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 23 2018, @09:30PM (#777906)

    I'll just post the answer key. They studied jumping out of a plane that was parked on the ground. Looked like maybe a 1 foot drop.

    So... the results are not incorrect~!!!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 24 2018, @02:50AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 24 2018, @02:50AM (#778004)

      I read it (I'm not the person you are responding to). I think the point is valid, research can be twisted to support whatever conclusion you want if you use the right assumption. Making broad generalizations, like "multivitamins are good" or "multivitamins are bad" or "multivitamins don't do anything" might depend on the assumptions and circumstances of their use.

    • (Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Monday December 24 2018, @04:30AM (1 child)

      by hendrikboom (1125) Subscriber Badge on Monday December 24 2018, @04:30AM (#778030) Homepage Journal

      It was a 0.6 metre jump. About 2 ft, not 1.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 24 2018, @09:46AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 24 2018, @09:46AM (#778056)

        Oh no not the metric system!