djdabush Posted September 22, 2009 Share Posted September 22, 2009 "But the latest work, based on the results of numerous different studies collectively involving millions of people, indicated that smoking bans have reduced heart attack rates by as much as 26% per year." Impossible, Bollocks, Sack of sh1te. To say that heart attacks have reduced by 26% in one year is absolute codswollop. Te government really don't do themselves any good by publishing such obvious lies. Indeed and they do such a good job of covering it up by publishing it in two American journals too. you think that's true then? a 26% drop in heart attacks last year? I have no idea, I have not read the journal articles in question. I did however read the BBC article and didn't just accuse the government of publishing obvious lies. I suspect that the studies in question are far more nuanced than the BBC report suggests, but this is what happens when journalist try and interpret statistics. Not sure what it has to do with the government though? EDIT: Unless you mean the DoH stat, which apparently is a 10% drop in heart attacks, not 26%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted September 22, 2009 VT Supporter Share Posted September 22, 2009 "But the latest work, based on the results of numerous different studies collectively involving millions of people, indicated that smoking bans have reduced heart attack rates by as much as 26% per year." Impossible, Bollocks, Sack of sh1te. To say that heart attacks have reduced by 26% in one year is absolute codswollop. Te government really don't do themselves any good by publishing such obvious lies. Indeed and they do such a good job of covering it up by publishing it in two American journals too. you think that's true then? a 26% drop in heart attacks last year? I have no idea, I have not read the journal articles in question. I did however read the BBC article and didn't just accuse the government of publishing obvious lies. I suspect that the studies in question are far more nuanced than the BBC report suggests, but this is what happens when journalist try and interpret statistics. Not sure what it has to do with the government though? EDIT: Unless you mean the DoH stat, which apparently is a 10% drop in heart attacks, not 26%. Bad Science is very good on this sort of thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts