Changes

(baseless attack deleted)

(baseless attack deleted)

:Assuming you mean the original article reporting the study, I agree completely. Rarely have a seen a more blatant example of [[junk science]]. You can't exclude people who die of breast cancer, from a study on breast cancer! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 13:06, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

:<s>Assuming you mean the original article reporting the study, I agree completely.</s> Rarely have a seen a more blatant example of [[junk science]]. You can't exclude people who die of breast cancer, from a study on breast cancer! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 13:06, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

::I'm sorry but wait just one cotton-picking horn-swaggling carn-sarnint (civility filter on) minute here, it doesnt say that the people who were excluded from followup as a result from death had died of breast cancer.  I have a hard time believing they'd just ignore those deaths if they did occur, where on earth did you get tie impression that they did?  Further, where the entry reads that it excludes women who got cancer afterwards, its excluding women who did and who didnt have abortions who got cancer afterwards because in those circumstances they're outside of the control of the experiment.  You're misreporting out of context factoids that otherwise would show how stirctly they adhered to the scientific method in a pathetic attempt to show how the study ignored the most relevant data it was examining, as though the entire scientific community wouldnt have jumped on their necks already.  No wonder why the CPedia front page gloats that "Only on Conservapedia" will use of the scientific method be deemed a sin.--[[User:RexMundane|RexMundane]] 13:45, 24 April 2007 (EDT)

::I'm sorry but wait just one cotton-picking horn-swaggling carn-sarnint (civility filter on) minute here, it doesnt say that the people who were excluded from followup as a result from death had died of breast cancer.  I have a hard time believing they'd just ignore those deaths if they did occur, where on earth did you get tie impression that they did?  Further, where the entry reads that it excludes women who got cancer afterwards, its excluding women who did and who didnt have abortions who got cancer afterwards because in those circumstances they're outside of the control of the experiment.  You're misreporting out of context factoids that otherwise would show how stirctly they adhered to the scientific method in a pathetic attempt to show how the study ignored the most relevant data it was examining, as though the entire scientific community wouldnt have jumped on their necks already.  No wonder why the CPedia front page gloats that "Only on Conservapedia" will use of the scientific method be deemed a sin.--[[User:RexMundane|RexMundane]] 13:45, 24 April 2007 (EDT)