Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,797
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 288:
Line 288: − − :::: What about Andy's hypothesis as to causality? We never heard what that was. It got me thinking though. If such an increase in cancer does exist, could it be because the "Hollywood" women generally have stressful jobs/lives? Are they merely a part of a greater group of stressed women who have a higher cancer risk? Or perhaps God just hates Hollywood and is smiting them. --[[User:LeopoldRex|LeopoldRex]] 21:55, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
Talk:Mystery:Young Hollywood Breast Cancer Victims (view source)
Revision as of 02:06, May 8, 2008
, 02:06, May 8, 2008Reverted edits by LeopoldRex (Talk); changed back to last version by Aschlafly
::: More generally, note that if you confine yourself to well-funded studies, then you limit yourself to what the funders of those studies want for their money. I'm interested in going outside of the narrow sphere of funded studies and looking at real-world data to draw important conclusions that no one is willing to fund and advertise.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:48, 7 May 2008 (EDT)
::: More generally, note that if you confine yourself to well-funded studies, then you limit yourself to what the funders of those studies want for their money. I'm interested in going outside of the narrow sphere of funded studies and looking at real-world data to draw important conclusions that no one is willing to fund and advertise.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:48, 7 May 2008 (EDT)