none of my results are statistically significant. what can i do? im begining to panic. will i still get my phd? what do i talk about in my discussion?

im meeting to discuss it today. my worry is that if i blag on about limitations to my methods, will my work be worth a phd?

How far in are you into your PhD? What field are you in? Do you get on well with your supervisor? Are there any other projects you could switch to/ do in paralel, that might not be so interesting but could get you more data?
If your data is not significant you will have a lot lot more to write about in your thesis, believe me!

erm.. im right at the end! i couldnt analyse before because of clinical trial guidelines, so i didnt have a clue what my results looked like till the end. im soo depressed. i cant do anymore work on it. i have spent 3 years working my butt off for my phd and now it looks like im not going to get it.

It's the nature of scientific research that much of the time you won't get the results you wanted or expected. That's the same whether you're a student or an established head of a group. I thought the idea of a PhD was to demonstrate that you understood the processes of science, not to get results that confirm a hypothesis. As long as you can demonstrate that you had a rational reason for choosing the methods that you did, and can discuss what next steps should be taken as a result of this unexpected lack of statistical significance, you should still be eligible.

Tina, I really sympathise! I am also at the end and am having related difficulties, but as my field is social sciences it's slightly different I think...the issue for me is originality. At first i was told to contextualise my findings with the literature, drawing out the similarities between my work and past studies. But then when I did that my supervisor suggested that this meant my findings weren't original...I have been told i really need to draw out the key original findings of my own work as that is a key criteria for a PhD. I'm not sure how truly original PhDs there are out there? or if it is a question of confidence in your work and the right emphasis?

Maybe the results are not significant. Not as exciting as positive results, but negative results are still results. I beleive that is fine for a PhD.

Is there obvious trends? Do you see say a decrease in a response but it is not significant? You can still discuss that. Its still a decrease. After all, all statistics do is give a probability that what you are seeing is a real change. They dont in themselves prove (or disprove) anything. They just add weight to your argument (though admitadly quite a bit, and usually required for publication). You could then discuss how you would go about confirming the result is true, or how to imporve the method, or collect more samples etc.

I have not seen my supervisor for ages. I was supposed to meet her on wednesday (which was planned 6 weeks in advance) and she canceled. Then I was told she will meet me today at 3:30 and again she didnt turn up.

I am doomed!

Tina, don't panic, you don't need +ve results for a PhD. You need to demonstrate in depth knowledge of your subject, novel research (which could well reveal -ve results) and understanding of the limitations of your work and how you would develop it (future work etc).

I'm sure that you manage to meet with your supervisor(s), they'll be able to reassure you.

I'm sure that WHEN you meet your supervisor(s)...etc