Wont see this on Faux

Discussion in 'Media' started by Douger, Dec 21, 2011.

  1. Douger
    Offline

    Douger BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    Messages:
    12,323
    Thanks Received:
    915
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Not fucking there !
    Ratings:
    +918
  2. blastoff
    Offline

    blastoff Undocumented Reg. User

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Messages:
    14,409
    Thanks Received:
    1,803
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    In a galaxy far far away...
    Ratings:
    +5,462
    So that means it will be seen on MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc.?
     
  3. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,658
    Thanks Received:
    7,422
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,347
    Bush did it.
     
  4. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,531
    Thanks Received:
    4,606
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +13,091
    What is Faux?
     
  5. Valerie
    Offline

    Valerie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    25,232
    Thanks Received:
    6,050
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,598
    Wow. :eusa_eh:



     
  6. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    30,531
    Thanks Received:
    4,606
    Trophy Points:
    1,170
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +13,091
    I had to reasearch this "journal" because even though I'm a healthcare professional, I've never heard of it. Here's a little gem from the publishers about this:

    "The Journal contains articles on health and social policy, political economy and sociology, history and philosophy, ethics and law in the areas of health and health care. The Journal provides analysis of developments in the health and social sectors of every area of the world, including relevant scholarly articles, position papers, and stimulating debates about the most controversial issues of the day. It is of interest to health professionals and social scientists interested in the many different facets of health, disease, and health care."

    Sounds like a "journal" with an agenda.

    It was praised highly by the WHO which we know has an agenda. I smell a rat here.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. daveman
    Offline

    daveman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    51,299
    Thanks Received:
    5,693
    Trophy Points:
    1,775
    Location:
    On the way to the Dark Tower.
    Ratings:
    +5,761
    Medical News: Study Aims to Link Japanese Reactor Leaks Deaths in U.S. - in Public Health & Policy, Environmental Health from MedPage Today
    In a telephone press conference, Mangano said the finding is a "clarion call for more extensive research."

    But he told MedPage Today that the researchers can't rule out factors other than the Fukushima radiation that might have accounted for the excess.

    "There are probably a variety of factors that could be linked to this excess of 14,000 deaths," he said. "But it does raise a red flag."

    On the contrary, any link between the deaths and the radiation released by the reactors is "very, very unlikely" simply because the levels are low, according to Richard Morin, PhD, of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla.

    Morin told MedPage Today that such an acute effect would be unlikely, unless radiation levels were four or five orders of magnitude higher than those reported by Mangano and Sherman, and the whole body of the victim was exposed.

    Typically, he said, the effect of low-level ionizing radiation doesn't appear until years after the exposure.

    Morin, who is chair of the American College of Radiology's safety committee, said an earlier public report by the authors on the same issue -- preceding the journal article -- "has not been taken seriously by the scientific community."

    He added it's important to remember that "association doesn't imply causation."​
    The study is crap and was conducted by people who want to shut down all nuclear power plants.

    Dismissed.
     
  8. Valerie
    Offline

    Valerie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    25,232
    Thanks Received:
    6,050
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,598



    Yeah, I wonder how they made that determination that the infant deaths were caused by radiation exposure...Just by virtue of the timing or what???



     
  9. daveman
    Offline

    daveman Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    51,299
    Thanks Received:
    5,693
    Trophy Points:
    1,775
    Location:
    On the way to the Dark Tower.
    Ratings:
    +5,761
    Pretty much. But then, leftist "scientists" believe that correlation implies causation. Look at AGW.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. Valerie
    Offline

    Valerie Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2008
    Messages:
    25,232
    Thanks Received:
    6,050
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +10,598


    Yeah it looks to me like any anti-nuke organization could just pluck a statistic out of thin air and claim that the correlation equals causation...Which of course it does not.




    [​IMG]
    Photo of Christie and Joseph Mangano, at 2008 RPHP luncheon

    Christie Brinkley discusses RPHP in the cover story of the June 2010 Ladies Home Journal
    As an activist concerned about the dangers of nuclear power plants, she can knowledgeably cite facts and figures about the issue.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2011

Share This Page