Re: Police: Wash. man pointed gun at woman for smoking while pregnant
Terminology is critical when it comes to inferential statistics. Iíve read the study and examined its statistical protocols. Itís a legitimate, random analysis conducted by MIT that established a link between fuel emission fumes and premature deaths, NOT cause and effect.
Originally Posted by Bellicose
No inferential statistical analysis establishes cause and effect. It uncovers a correlation among the independent and dependent variables under study.
Correlation coefficients go from zero to one and all the fractions in-between. Assuming a valid statistical study, a coefficient of zero means there is absolutely no connection, while a coefficient of one means the link is perfect.
In this study, the coefficient was 0.89, which is a very strong correlation suggesting that close to 79% of the studyís correlation can be attributed to the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.
I donít know if youíve ever been in the United Kingdom. I have been there many times. The weather environment there is very close and conductive, in parts of some cities, to pollution saturation. In some areas you can actually see pollution clouds just hanging in the air.
Now, youíre perfectly free to chalk all this up to a pile of intellectual baffle-gab if you desire. But, it isnít. You may also test it in real time right here in this country.
Find a road route that is heavily-traveled with heavy trucks and various sized automobiles and pick-up trucks. Also make sure itís fairly surrounded by buildings and other structures that tend to inhibit pollutant dispersions into the atmosphere.
At this point, all you have to do is spend about 6-months breathing those fumes anywhere from 2 to 3-hours a day. You knowÖ like people who have to work in large congested cities day in and day out for their entire lives do.
Then just sit back and wait for anywhere from 5 to 20-years. Chances are that youíll be about 4 times more likely to be rewarded with some form of lung cancer, some other equally hideous form of lung disease, or a pollution-related brain tumor.
Please note, however, that this does not guarantee that you will develop these diseases. It simply means that you would be far more likely to develop them than someone not exposed to this degree of pollution.
But the question remains eternal: would you like to take the chance if you had other choices?
Even if the pessimists are right, in the end, the optimists will have had a much more enjoyable trip through life.