333
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 331:
Line 331: + +
Talk:Mystery:Young Hollywood Breast Cancer Victims (view source)
Revision as of 09:56, May 9, 2008
, 09:56, May 9, 2008→Reply
:It's not legitimate to take those 100 without knowing how the number was determined. Why the reluctance to clarify? And the cause is completely orthogonal to the question of whether the rate is elevated. [[User:Murray|Murray]] 23:48, 8 May 2008 (EDT)
:It's not legitimate to take those 100 without knowing how the number was determined. Why the reluctance to clarify? And the cause is completely orthogonal to the question of whether the rate is elevated. [[User:Murray|Murray]] 23:48, 8 May 2008 (EDT)
:I’m sorry, Aschlafly, but I really have no idea what you mean. What is obvious? Why do you expect Hollywood types to have a higher incidence of breast cancer? But in any case (as Murray says), the hypothetical causal link is completely irrelevant to the study methods. And you have presented no data that provide any evidence whatsoever whether the incidence in Hollywood is higher, lower, or the same as that in the global population. Various people have pointed out flaws in the methodology. If you are not prepared to listen – well, it’s your website, and you are entitled to make a fool of yourself on it. [[User:Humblpi|Humblpi]] 05:56, 9 May 2008 (EDT)