Theodoric
Member Posts: 9199 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.2
|
|
Message 141 of 145 (269125)
12-14-2005 3:53 AM
|
Reply to: Message 69 by randman
11-30-2005 2:28 AM
|
|
Peer reviewed
Randman, you use the fact this is in a peer reviewed journal to justify sayoing it is true. Just because it is in a peer reviewed journal means nothing. What I would like to see is some peer-reviews of the article and data. The Lancet has published some very poor research in the past. For example endorsing a link between the MMR vaccine and autism, which has been discredited, also last year they published an article that 100,000 iraqis had been killed in the war. This was much higher than subsequent studies.
You have done this in the past and I have called you on it before. That it is published in a peer reviewed magazine does not make it any more true than anything else published. Show me some peer reviews and then you can have a basis for making the claim it is in a peer reviewed magazine
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 69 by randman, posted 11-30-2005 2:28 AM | | randman has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 142 by randman, posted 12-15-2005 10:47 AM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2