I'm really suppose to be working, but this took me 5 minutes to find:
From
http://www.iraqanalysis.org/local/041101lancetpmos.html
Which argued for the Lancet article and against the British government
response and I quote:
Had the Fallujah sample been included, the survey's estimate would hav
Martin wrote
>To start with, this is not a "study on US induced deaths in Iraq". More
>importantly, this story about the Fallujah cluster is something you
>have simply made up.
Are you saying that Fallujah wasn't excluded because of problems with the
results there? Seriously? Or are you saying
On 2/9/11, Dan Minette wrote:
> The Lancet, in my book, has published other studies that were questionable
> from the beginning. For example, they published a study on US induced
> deaths in Iraq that found that a quarter of the population of Faluja had
> died due to the early fighting (early wa
On Feb 9, 2011, at 8:03 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and not attribute to malice
what can
be explained by incompetence.
You, sir, are un-American :-). Well said.
Dave
___
http://box535.bluehost.com/mailman/listi
>I think there have been discussions here previously about vaccines, and
>while there might well be some people, especially children, who can have
>difficulty with multiple vaccines, the issue of vaccination causing autism
>is particularly fear-inducing. But the 1998 'study' has been judged
>frau
