Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Heart attack drop and the statistics were unrelated - that was my point. Heh, I have to be careful here, as I'm reminded of your ludicrous graph showing the connection between mrsa and recycling. But in the case of scotland, the rate at which heart attacks fell doubled after the ban. Now there's no direct way of proving a connection, how could you unless you had a control group happily smoking away in the workplace, but it does look like even at this early stage the ban has helped public health. Besides, much of the benefits are in reducing long term health issues, so it's still a bit wait and see. But I don't understand the doubt: - smoking is harmful - therefore second hand smoking must be, even if the harm is reduced. It's the same smoke, right? - reducing exposure to second hand smoke is beneficial to public health Where's the flaw? Yes I do still dispute much of the evidence, and e.g. studies. But, as much as you cherry pickers want to divert the issue, let's stick to the point shall we - there is no serious scientific evidence for the claim being made by Anita Imberger - either way. Though with similar levels of smoking prevalance, off-licence sales shooting up, and people only able to do it in certain places - I know what I'd be putting my money on. Bizzare She was, the way I read it, disputing the claims that were made in the same way you're doing. She's saying there's no evidence. Shame she goes on to say it's reduced despite the lack of evidence, thus canceling the story out and making it cease to exist! There's only one solution if there's any doubt, ban tobacco in the home too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 Heh, I have to be careful here, as I'm reminded of your ludicrous graph showing the connection between mrsa and recycling. Ludicrous - Adjective - Anything Slim/Ai_Droid does not agree with, or understand It'll only be ludicrous if it is disproven over time. In the meantime it remains a hypothesis, but if you want to prove it's ludicrous in the meantime, feel free - but I bet you can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 There's only one solution if there's any doubt, ban tobacco in the home too! Would you seriously back such an idea if it came about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 It'll only be ludicrous if it is disproven over time. In the meantime it remains a hypothesis, but if you want to prove it's ludicrous in the meantime, feel free - but I bet you can't. You can't have it both ways Albert. It's either bollocks science or it's a provable link. Does smoking make you thick too? Would you seriously back such an idea if it came about? Yes, and I'd happily back the full banning of them too. Why should kids be exposed to addictive substances in the home just because they're born to a smoker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 It'll only be ludicrous if it is disproven over time. In the meantime it remains a hypothesis, but if you want to prove it's ludicrous in the meantime, feel free - but I bet you can't. You can't have it both ways Albert. It's either bollocks science or it's a provable link. Does smoking make you thick too? That's exactly what I said Einstein. Science does determine if things are either 'bollocks' or 'provable' - starting with a hypothesis. Psuedo science and cherry picking doesn't. Obviously smoking makes me cleverer and better at reading than you. Perhaps I should put a psuedo science research paper together using you as proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebees Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You are a twat Slim. (I think that is quite a kind name to call you) Bring back hanging thats what I say, bring it back and hang the smokers, the drinkers, the people having sex out of wed-lock, the non believers in God and anyone else who gets in the way of the church or what ever buzz controler is in fashion this week, so many to choose from.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 That's exactly what I said Einstein. Science does determine if things are either 'bollocks' or 'provable' - starting with a hypothesis. Psuedo science and cherry picking doesn't. The lady in question hasn't actually revealed her sources, she may be making those claims using data as ludicrous as your MRSI/recycling 'hypothesis'. We will have to wait a bit longer for the trends to show, the doubling of the rate of decrease in Scotland is encouraging though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You are a twat Slim. (I think that is quite a kind name to call you) Great, thanks. Bring back hanging thats what I say, bring it back and hang the smokers, the drinkers, the people having sex out of wed-lock, the non believers in God and anyone else who gets in the way of the church or what ever buzz controler is in fashion this week, so many to choose from.... I made quite a clear distinction, you can do what the hell you like to yourself, just don't put others at risk. Isn't that fair enough? Isn't that live and let live? Does that make me the twat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 You are a twat Slim. (I think that is quite a kind name to call you) Bring back hanging thats what I say, bring it back and hang the smokers, the drinkers, the people having sex out of wed-lock, the non believers in God and anyone else who gets in the way of the church or what ever buzz controler is in fashion this week, so many to choose from.... You tell him bees. Who wants to lie in hospital dying next to a fat opinionated git who believes anything, only as long as it's what he wants to hear, dying of 'nothing'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You tell him bees. Who wants to lie in hospital dying next to a fat opinionated git who believes anything, only as long as it's what he wants to hear, dying of 'nothing'. Ha, who you calling fat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 That's exactly what I said Einstein. Science does determine if things are either 'bollocks' or 'provable' - starting with a hypothesis. Psuedo science and cherry picking doesn't. The lady in question hasn't actually revealed her sources, she may be making those claims using data as ludicrous as your MRSI/recycling 'hypothesis'. We will have to wait a bit longer for the trends to show, the doubling of the rate of decrease in Scotland is encouraging though. You mean it's her hypothesis? The doubling of the rate of decrease of heart attacks, if that's what you mean, has already proven to be bogus and a misuse of statistics. The claim has been withdrawn i.e. by not being formally published. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 You mean it's her hypothesis? I mean I don't know, she's not revealed her source. She may have some data that's we're not aware of, given that's her job. The doubling of the rate of decrease of heart attacks, if that's what you mean, has already proven to be bogus and a misuse of statistics. The claim has been withdrawn i.e. by not being formally published. No, you misunderstand, the original article had much larger claims, but the actual change, according to the article you linked, was a doubling of the reduction in the already dropping rate of heart attacks. This could be a spike, there's been spikes before as the article said, we'll need longer term data to see if it's a trend or not. Similar report here: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=n...&id=6583273 The rate of heart attacks decreasing accelerated after the ban, again long term data might show this to be nothing to do with the ban, but it's encouraging. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Tatlock Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 The rate of heart attacks decreasing accelerated after the ban, again long term data might show this to be nothing to do with the ban, but it's encouraging. It also didn't show that fairy cakes had nothing to do with causing the extinction of the dinosaurs - which no doubt, is encouraging news for Britain's fairy cake makers, who I'm sure hope this trend continues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 My comments about your imagination come from your apparent inability to see things from anyone elses perspective, Ermmm.... sorry to have to say this, Slim... but something involving pots, kettles and an extremely dark colour spring to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Ermmm.... sorry to have to say this, Slim... but something involving pots, kettles and an extremely dark colour spring to mind. For example? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.