Scientific literature as argumentation?

Scientific literature has a unique reputation in today's society.  I feel as though the vast majority of people rarely interact with scientific journals directly and many may feel intimidated by the scope of publications available and complexity of the language.  However, some will attempt to navigate this field of academia to look for a specific topic to satisfy a curiosity, an assignment, or just a quest for knowledge.

However, even among those who frequent PubMed or Nature, I believe that few (including myself) would immediately associate scientific literature with argumentation.  However, when I began to think of scientific literature as argumentation, I could make strong associations and see the inherent connection.

A scientific paper is a very structured argument about why the researcher's proposed hypothesis is correct.  The methods and results provide a context for the information presented and the discussion states the reasons backed by the evidence already presented.  It is beautifully logical.  However, not all scientific articles that attempt to make an argument are set up this way.

For example, I came upon a scientific article that was of special interest to me entitled, "Iron supplementation in athletes- first do no harm" that appeared in the journal Nutrition.  It was not primary literature but a review that covered many elements of iron supplementation to make the claim that iron supplements should be more tightly controlled and only used by athletes who are clinically iron deficient.  The reasoning behind this claim was that additional iron supplementation when normal (or even low) iron levels existed had no benefit on performance.  Additionally, higher iron levels may damage the liver or heart and increase the risk of diabetes.

However, I feel like the argument was rather one sided and weak as it failed to recognize that some non-deficient athletes can be helped by supplements and it did not attempt to address the issue of appropriate dosages.  I believe it was meant to be read by doctors and health professionals who work with athletes as well as researchers interested in iron regulation.  However, the audience may include ambitous athletes who took it upon themselves to learn about professional recommendations in iron supplementation.

I found the argumentation of this article especially interesting because of my own research on iron regulation in female runners this semester. I am working on a project investigating elements that effect iron regulation.  We are focusing on hormonal control as well as monocyte recycling.  This article made no mention of hormonal control or variations in recycling mechanisms.  This is likely because it was published in 2004 before this newer research had been released yet.

I have a unique perspective on the issue as I am a runner who is taking iron supplements after an experience with severe anemia as well as a researcher in the field of iron regulation.  I think that this article does a good job of summarizing relevant research in the field but makes a one sided argument. It gives many examples of situations where supplementation is not helpful but I think it is lacking in showing how prevalent an issue it is in certain populations.  I agree with many of the points that were made but I think the article fails to recognize what a complex issue this is.  Obviously the first objective is to "do no harm," but in this case the long term harm is silent and latent but the potential harm by not supplementing may be an impeding sacrificed competitive season.   Iron supplementation only given to the clinically deficient is like waiting for a problem to occur and then fixing it.

Reading this article makes me want to sit down with the researchers and writers and ask them about their claims.  Since there is still a lot of grey area in this field, I am really curious on other's ideas and perspectives.  It is enjoyable to be able to read a scientific article with a critical eye because usually the scientific jargon and level of understanding of material is beyond the scope of my current knowledge.

I will revisit this issue in the future as this iron research project is ongoing and I am hoping that this blog can help me to share my findings and ideas.

Kaitlyn