Hi Chris. I'm curious. Have you read this study by Daling? If so, would you send it to me?
Chris wrote: > "Similar information was obtained from 961 control women > identified through random digit dialing within these same counties." > My statement stands UNcorrected for the most simple of logical > reasons ... your alleged "correction" was erroneous upon its face > and most importantly of all because what I wrote is unequivocally > TRUTH! I concede that not reading the study in its entirety limits my ability to consider the full merits of the study, but the abstract says enough to raise serious questions about the validity of Dr. Joseph's statements. Furthermore, I concede that I quickly glanced over the abstract and at first did not catch that there were 961 randomly dialed people who perhaps were not cancer patients. The fact is that I was shocked to find such a limited sample size from such a limited group being applied in the way that you did with your statement. Furthermore, this is a very odd way to do a study, where you have half of the sample from a very defined group and then randomly select a control group. For the conclusion that you make from the study, this is the wrong experimental design. I would have to read the study itself and see what kind of statistical analysis she does, but it is clear that there are problems here. Now concerning your assertion that what you wrote is unequivocally truth. Here is what you wrote: Here's what you wrote Chris: > Every female 18 years and under who had an abortion, and > also had a relative afflicted by breast cancer (mother, sister or > aunt) was also afflicted by breast cancer by the age of 45! The problem with your statement here is that the study you cite excluded people born prior to 1944. Since the study only included women who were diagnosed with cancer prior to May of 1990, that age 45 is an articfact of this study's design. There were not women included in the study who were over age 45! Furthermore, we are dealing with a small sample size from only three counties in Washington state. To extrapolate the kind of statement you make to the rest of the world is unwarranted based upon this study alone. Let me give you an example of the kind of error possible here. Suppose I call 100 patients under the age of 45 from the local cancer clinic and find that every girl who had an abortion at age 18 also had a relative who had cancer. Would it be warranted for me to start warning women that if they have an abortion prior to age 18 and they have a relative who also has cancer, that she will definitely have cancer before she turns 45? Don't you see the problems with me making such a statement based upon such a small sample size? The way you reported the study, it sounded like every female in the world who was 18 years and younger and who had both an abortion and a relative with breast cancer became afflicted with cancer before age 45. Surely you understand that all I have to do to falsify this idea is find one woman who had an abortion at age 18 or younger and who also had a relative with breast cancer but who did not herself develop cancer by the age of 45. Do you really think that such a female does not exist, based upon this study by Janet Daling? Chris wrote: > The Melbye "study" that you mistakenly allege "was done > much better" ... has been thoroughly discredited. ... That > study when HONESTLY analyzed in fact was reported > to show a 40% increase in breast cancer amongst those > with induced abortions. Well, I guess you had better pass along the reference to that source too. Obviously, I was impressed with the much larger sample size in that study. Nevertheless, I admit too that I get suspicious of a study that says it concludes something when taking out certain factors. How that is done is important because it can skew the results of statistical models. Btw, did the Denmark study find any women who had abortions at 18 years or younger with relatives who had cancer that did not develop cancer themselves by age 45? :-) Peace be with you. David Miller, Beverly Hills, Florida USA ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
