On 5 December 2008 Chris Green posted: >Wow. Who knew that (Googling) Toronto was so politically divisive? >Check out the largest positive and negative correlations. >http://statestats.appspot.com/?q=toronto
Quote on the webpage in question: "Be careful drawing conclusions from this data." :-) Stephen Black please note. :-) Allen Esterson Former lecturer, Science Department Southwark College, London http://www.esterson.org *************************************************************************** *************** [tips] Social network effects: for real? sblack Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:14:25 -0800 Much excitement in the news about a study just published in BMJ (British Medical Journal): Dynamic spread of happiness in a large social network: longitudinal analysis over 20 years in the Framingham Heart Study James H Fowler and Nicholas A Christakis. BMJ 2008 337: a2338 Full text at http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/337/dec04_2/a2338 Conclusion: "People´s happiness depends on the happiness of others with whom they are connected." which, of course, is a causal conclusion. But lesser attention appears to have been paid to another study published simultaneously in the same issue: Detecting implausible social network effects in acne, height, and headaches: longitudinal analysis Ethan Cohen-Cole and Jason M Fletcher. BMJ 2008;337:a2533 Full text at http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/337/dec04_2/a2533 They found that a friend´s acne problems increased one's own acne problems, a friend's headaches increased one's own headaches, and a friend's height increased one's own height. Given the first two, it seems one is better off without friends. Their conclusion: "Researchers should be cautious in attributing correlations in health outcomes of close friends to social network effects, especially when environmental confounders are not adequately controlled for in the analysis" Now see the first study again. Stephen --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
