Epidemiology - Understanding Dairy Studies with Dr. Daryl Nydam, Cornell University; Dr. Stephen LeBlanc, University of Guelph

Dr. Nydam and Dr. LeBlanc recently presented a Real Science Lecture series webinar on August 7, 2024. You can find the link at balchem.com/realscience.

Dr. Nydam begins with a brief overview of the concepts from the webinar, all based on understanding and applying information from different types of studies on dairy cow health and performance. Dr. LeBlanc adds that their goal was for the webinar to be useful for people with a practical interest in feeding and managing dairy cows. (4:12)

Dr. Nydam discusses different kinds of bias in research. All studies have some bias in them to some extent, so acknowledging, understanding, and trying to control for that is critical. Dr. LeBlanc describes survivor bias. In the simplest sense, survivor bias can be thought of as who’s alive to be counted. Several examples of treatments causing animals to be removed from a study or a disease-causing animal to be culled are reviewed. (8:24)

Both guests give their perspectives on p-values. A p-value tells us the likelihood that a difference we observe is due to chance. There is active discussion among statisticians about the value of the p-value. Both guests suggest that readers should also assess if the study achieved its stated objective and if there are adequate numbers and statistical power to accomplish the objective. P-values help us understand risk. A p-value does not tell us how big a difference was or how important it was. (18:54)

Dr. Nydam reviews that there are two kinds of study validity: internal and external. Internal validity centers around whether the study was done well. Was bias controlled for and acknowledged? External validity centers around the applicability of the study to the population. Is a study about mastitis treatment in water buffalo in Pakistan applicable to a dairy farm on Prince Edward Island? Peer review usually takes care of assessing internal validity. External validity is more up to each reader to decide for themself and their situation. (29:01)

Scott asks about the validity of field trial data. Both guests acknowledge the inherent challenges of field studies and give some tips for success. Field studies can often have good external validity because they are done under real-world conditions and at scale. (34:23)

The group dives into the topic of industry-funded research. Some skepticism and cynicism about industry-funded research exists. Industry-funded studies are not inherently biased and often answer important and tangible questions for decision-makers. Government funding is rarely going to be awarded to that type of research, but the industry is interested in funding it. If an industry-funded study is well done by a reputable researcher, has gone through the peer review process, and has appropriate methods and statistics, Dr. Nydam sees no reason to discount it. (44:56)

Dr. LeBlanc reminds the audience when looking at different kinds of studies and different types of evidence, it’s not that one type of study is good and others are not. For a lot of health-related research in dairy cows, we don’t have good (or any) experimental models to reproduce things in a white-coat-science sort of way. At the end of the day, dairy managers and industry professionals want to know if a particular piece of science, whether experimental or observational, helps them make decisions on the farm. There’s a place for all types of research as long as it’s done well and in its own right.  (42:08)

Dr. Nydam’s key takeaway is that it’s important to remember to keep some faith in science and have open discourse about it as we move forward in dairy science and as a society. Dr. LeBlanc reminds the audience that even if listeners are not in the business of designing, conducting, and analyzing their experiments, they do not need to feel powerless as consumers of scientific information. It can and should be something they