Can experiments detect differences that matter?
Finding differences matters because if one variable changes or if anything slightly changes then results may be altered. These changes can determine whether a study is valid or not.
Does the study show causation or correlation?
Causation is shown by one directly affects the other. Shows that there’s a relationship, but doesn’t state how. The reverse was not explored. The effects of poor health and the gut microbiome was not looked at as it should’ve been. Causation is important because it shows us why something happens and then supports that. Correlation is how things are related, but without real reason.
What is the mechanism?
The mechanism shows the relationship between variables. Mechanisms explain why and how things occur in a study.
How much do experiments reflect reality?
If experiments are replicated to reality as best as possible (such as the same environments and such) then experiments do really well for providing new information to the science community. If details are not as the environments that the study is focusing on, then it would not be very accurate. It also would not lead to any useful information.
Could anything else explain the results?
If there are other aspects that are providing validity to the results then that would mean that variables may not be as controlled as they should be or there are other variables that are not taken into account at the beginning. If there are many things that could explain the results which was not the original target then that would mean the experiment is not as accurate and needs to be refined.
These questions all are important when discussing controversy because we need to be able to determine if there are other ways results could occur other than the proper outcome. I think the question that matters the most is mechanisms because altering these just slightly can yield very different results.