The standard approach to most allometric research is to gather data on a biological function and a measure of body size, convert the data to logarithms, display the new values in a bivariate plot, and then fit a straight line to the transformations by the method of least squares. The slope of the fitted line provides an estimate for the allometric (or scaling) exponent, which often is interpreted in the context of underlying principles of structural and functional design. However, interpretations of this sort are based on the implicit assumption that the original data conform with a power function having an intercept of 0 on a plot with arithmetic coordinates. Whenever this assumption is not satisfied, the resulting estimate for the allometric exponent may be seriously biased and misleading. The problem of identifying an appropriate function is compounded by the logarithmic transformations, which alter the relationship between the original variables and frequently conceal the presence of outliers having an undue influence on properties of the fitted equation, including the estimate for the allometric exponent. Much of the current controversy in allometric research probably can be traced to substantive biases introduced by investigators who followed standard practice. We illustrate such biases with examples taken from the literature and outline a general methodology by which the biases can be minimized in future research.