[del82]

It's absolutely true that we should consider the source for this and any other reviews / studies / news articles etc., and be aware of their likely position.

We should also recognize that, for all but the most mainstream possible questions or topics, most of the study is going to come from interest groups-- they're the ones who are interested enough to do the work to look at the data and publish their results!

If we dismiss reviews like this out-of-hand simply because they are created by an interest group, then we'll miss out on a lot of information and opportunity for reasonable discourse.

(Note that I'm not saying the parent comment is advocating this, but it did raise the point in my mind.)

[1234letshaveatw]

Studies largely come from academia, and (in theory) would be/should be independent. Studies coming from authors with a bias or conflict of interest should be flagged, not dismissed, which appeared to be the intent of the parent.

[gruez]

>Studies largely come from academia

Source? I'd imagine for public policy think thanks and government agencies make up a significant chunk as well.

[KaiserPro]

There are two types of study.

A peer reviewed study, with published data and methodology. (it might even be accurate, unless you're a sociologist)

then there is a "study" created by a think tank, PR firm pretending to be a think tank, or a dipshit company pushing something or other.

The latter a good for seeing which rich prick, or group of pricks has the time and money to push a specific agenda. and not much else.