At 12:50 PM -0800 12/12/06, Don Allen wrote:
While I appreciate the dangers of using correlations to demonstrate
a causal relationship I think that we should consider these data
carefully. If you are suggesting that it is only a spurious
relationship then what would you propose as a logical "third
variable" to account for the apparent connection?
Paul Brandon wrote:
At 8:02 AM -0500 12/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Researchers still don't understand why severely depressed
teenagers are more likely than adults to commit suicide while
taking antidepressant drugs like Paxil, but a major study out of
UCLA concluded that the drugs do more good than harm. Starting in
the early 1960s, the annual U.S. suicide rate held fairly steady
at 12 to 14 instances per 100,000--until 1988, when the first of a
new generation of antidepressants, the selective serotonin
reuptake inhibitors, was introduced. The suicide rate has been
falling ever since, to around 10 per 100,000. The investigators
estimate that nearly 34,000 lives have been saved.
Since much of the discussion has been focused on the fact that
antidepressants don't work, how would you explain this result?
There are many (possibly and infinite number) of possible alternative
hypotheses.
The burden of proof is on those making the original claim to
eliminate those alternatives through good research design and
execution.
--
The best argument against Intelligent Design is that fact that
people believe in it.
* PAUL K. BRANDON [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
* Psychology Dept Minnesota State University *
* 23 Armstrong Hall, Mankato, MN 56001 ph 507-389-6217 *
* http://krypton.mnsu.edu/~pkbrando/ *
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
