This was scanned from the edition and mechanically checked against a commercial copy of the text from CDROM. Differences were corrected against the paper edition. The text itself is thus a highly accurate rendition.
The confidence intervals all straddle 1. Any claim after this point is a display of incredible chutzpah. You don't have to believe me.
Go ask a statistician. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Frankly, I'll take the IJC's word for it.
Believe me, I don't believe you. Do you wonder why? Because you're a fanatic, I guess. I'd think that you'd at least want to find out what a confidence interval is. Look it up - it won't take long. When dealing with odds ratios ORsthe magic number is 1.
If you can get your CI completely above 1. If the interval is completely below 1. But if the interval straddles or even includes 1. That's officially called "not significant. And to claim an upper bound of a CI as the figure of merit is either ignorance or deliberate deceit.
There's another problem with retrospective studies and recall bias, particularly when both researchers and subjects are eager to cast blame, but we don't have to go that far to dismiss these results.
Like I said, go ask a statistician. Call an instructor at a local college. Go ahead - I dare you.
Furthermore, this was a retrospective study. At the time of the Surgeon General's Report, the SG's Committee vowed not to use retrospective studies because of the element of recall bias although, perhaps inadvertently, they wound up using quite a bit of retrospective data.
Given the well known and long recognized problems with these retrospective studies, it's surprising that any reputable scientist would take them seriously. But this study was funded by the Canadian government, which has an anti-smoking bias see Chapter 6 of my book, on the "LaLonde effect".
They don't care if the study is accurate, so long as it scares people into quitting smoking. It isn't necessary that studies prove or disprove anything. Studies support or reject a hypothesis or theory.
This study supports the theory that ETS is a causative factor for Lung Cancer and that makes it a worthwhile study. The study supports nothing of the kind. At most, it demonstrates that lung cancer victims will remember or think that they remember more exposure to second hand smoke than people who are not lung cancer victims.
That's called "recall bias" and is the reason why retrospective studies of this sort are worthless. Somebody funded the study and found the results useful enough to publish. While it proves nothing, it does support the growing body of evidence that ETS is harmful.
Smokers bitch about the uselessness or the inaccuracy or the poor design of studies and point out their deficiencies but studies continue to be done and they continue to support the need for a ban on ETS. The only way to remove recall bias is to conduct a prospective study over a period of many years, repeatedly interviewing the participants to determine their current exposure to primary or secondary smoke, and keeping track of the number of lung cancer cases that occur.
Doll started out to do something like that with his study of British doctors, but his study was thrown off track when, in the first few years of the study, practically all of the doctors quit smoking cigarettes.Banned books are books or other printed works such as essays or plays which are prohibited by law or to which free access is not permitted by other means.
The practice of banning books is a form of censorship, from political, legal, religious, moral, or (less often) commercial motives.
if a public e-cigarette ban reduces the number of smokers who switch to e-cigarettes by 2%. That is an inherently ambiguous phrasing. Percentages are proportion.
2% is 2 out of what? Free Smoking papers, essays, and research papers.
Public Smoking Should Be Banned - Furthermore, it is one of the aggravating causes of respiratory and circulatory illnesses in children, such as asthma, bronchitis, and pulmonary infections.
There are many bad effects of smoking related to health, social and psychological level which can harm the life of a person in great detail. This essay delves deeply into the origins of the Vietnam War, critiques U.S.
justifications for intervention, examines the brutal conduct of the war, and discusses the . Mar 01, · Scroll through this list of questions that touch on every aspect of contemporary life — from social media to sports, politics and school — and see which ones most inspire you to take a stand.