Junk Science Judo
A Short Course
Course Topics
All visitors subject to Terms of Service. Course Copyright © 2002 JunkScience.com. All rights reserved on original works. Material copyrighted by others is used either with permission or under a claim of "fair use"
Course based on "Junk Science Judo" by Steve Milloy © 2001 Cato Institute. All rights reserved.
You said: B. Nothing, the data is inconclusive
Correct!
Relative risks from 1.0 - 2.0 should be ignored. This study showed a relative risk of 1.3. In fact, the National Cancer Institute issued a special press release about abortion and breast cancer stating, "In epidemiologic research, relative risks of less than 2 are considered small and usually difficult to interpret. Such increases may be due to chance, statistical bias or effects of confounding factors not evident (18)"
BEWARE! Junk scientists may try to counter the criticism of a weak association by claiming, "Even a small risk applied to a large population could be a significant public health problem". This is certainly true, but it presumes that relative risk is a measure of risk. IT IS NOT!
Relative risk is only a statistical comparison of two study groups. Relative risk helps determine where future study might be needed. It does not establish a cause-and-effect relationship.
(18) National Cancer Institute, "Abortion and Possible Risk for Breast Cancer: Analysis and Inconsistencies," October 26, 1994
Well done! Now let's examine what you can do about junk science...
