Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by davidhbolton 683 days ago
A bit more nuanced attack on Stockwell.

He and his team started with 3,248 relevant studies of which 3,125 were immediately discarded. This left 123 cohort studies to which they added 87 relatively recent cohort studies. They then discarded 103 of these because they didn’t meet Stockwell’s increasingly stringent and somewhat arbitrary criteria. This left 107 studies, but there was still work to do.

... In his comments to the Guardian he more or less admits that he is only doing this because the benefits of alcohol consumption are inconvenient to people like him who want to regulate booze like tobacco...

From https://snowdon.substack.com/p/cherry-picking-the-evidence-o...

1 comments

Would you admit - just for the sake of more balanced arguments - that there's another possible reason for the exclusion of the majority of studies? Like visible bias towards "alcohol in reasonable amounts {is | may be} {good | not making harm} for health" opinion?