Debate

Migratory birds, the H5N1 influenza virus and the scientific method

Thomas P Weber¹ and Nikolaos I Stilianakis^1,2

¹Joint Research Centre, European Commission, T.P. 267, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, I-21027 Ispra, Italy

²University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Department of Biometry and Epidemiology, Waldstr. 6, D-91054 Erlangen, Germany

author email corresponding author email

Virology Journal 2008, 5:57doi:10.1186/1743-422X-5-57

Published:	9 May 2008

Abstract

Background

The role of migratory birds and of poultry trade in the dispersal of highly pathogenic H5N1 is still the topic of intense and controversial debate. In a recent contribution to this journal, Flint argues that the strict application of the scientific method can help to resolve this issue.

Discussion

We argue that Flint's identification of the scientific method with null hypothesis testing is misleading and counterproductive. There is far more to science than the testing of hypotheses; not only the justification, bur also the discovery of hypotheses belong to science. We also show why null hypothesis testing is weak and that Bayesian methods are a preferable approach to statistical inference. Furthermore, we criticize the analogy put forward by Flint between involuntary transport of poultry and long-distance migration.

Summary

To expect ultimate answers and unequivocal policy guidance from null hypothesis testing puts unrealistic expectations on a flawed approach to statistical inference and on science in general.