Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
KMA, since you seem to admire the methodology used to conclude that cigarette smoking is harmful, how about showing us an example of a research paper that used good methodology that came to this conclusion.
Then what I will do is show you a research article on SHS that used the same methodology that came to the conclusion that SHS is harmful.
How about it?
|
You'll have to give me some time on this, but sure. We are talking about research and studies conducted way before the internet (If I remember correctly, the original smoking studies were conducted in the 50's and 60's), so I don't know how much I will find online.
We need to set limits, though....no articles, just studies.
There is one potential fatal flaw here though: I can't concede to a research study that uses the 1992-1993 EPA study as a reference. No matter how hard I would try, I cannot get past the flaws in that study to see anything that uses it as a reference objectively.
It would be the same if I showed you a study that says SHS is safe, and the study happens to be conducted by a scientist employed by RJ Reynolds or Philip Morris--you wouldn't accept that either--the core flaw (in this case, conflict of interest) would prejudice you to any of the results, regardless of whether they are true or not.
Sorry, but I am just being honest about it upfront.
New thread? or in here?
Offline or online?