Welcome Back

It’s been a long time, and lots has changed over the past six years. I didn’t have much to say for quite a while, but I just started writing a little bit about Fake News. So why not bring it back to where I started, right? Take a peek:

We all hate fake news, right? We need to start railing against skewed, misleading news as well herunterladen englisch. So let’s talk about how we can all be better consumers of medical literature that is presented by mainstream media.

Consider the article at the bottom of this piece, from CNN, entitled “Teens who Vape or Use Hookah are More Likely to Use Marijuana Later, Study Finds,” which is a summary of a study in the journal Pediatrics. This article is particularly relevant today, for several reasons:

1) The legalization of marijuana is an important and growing political issue zuma spiel kostenlos herunterladen.
2) Mainstream media has come under intense fire, sometimes fairly, sometimes not.
3) CNN is considered by many, although surely not all, as a “middle of the road” media site, which *theoretically* has less political bias than other major news outlets.
4) While science is mostly paving the way for cannibis as a relatively safe drug for recreational use – especially when compared with cigarettes and alcohol – with several medicinal benefits, its use by teens is somewhat more murky lightroom presets kostenlos download.
This is understandable, given the younger brain is not fully developed.

Let’s understand CNN’s slant from both a framing and scientific perspective:

CNN does not say that cannabis is bad for either teens or adults, this is solely about likelihood of use based on prior vaping or hookah-ing (if that’s a verb). That restraint by CNN is a good thing. However, when one reads the article, important questions for the reader should immediately come to mind:

1) Teens are “more likely” to use marijuana *how often?* Ten times per day musik in cd qualitäten? Once per year? Note that the answer to this question is buried at the bottom of the article, and the answer to that question is “we have no idea, we didn’t measure that.” For a society that often *only* reads the headline and perhaps a few paragraphs, this presentation of the title as only “more likely” is a natural anxiety generator for parents.

2) What does “more likely” mean in terms of causality, if anything? All we know, based on this study, is that hookha/vaping is *correlated* with later marijuana use how to download on youtube. The default in society, based on articles such as this, is that one variable is causing the other. This is where a keen eye is required. One of the first rules of statistics is “correlation does not imply causation.” When two variables are correlated, factor A *may* cause Factor B, or Factor B *may* cause Factor A, or a third factor might be an underlying mechanism for the variation of both.
Note that the lead investigator says that the correlation does not *necessarily* imply causation. This is a misleading statement, as correlation does not imply causation, period herunterladen. The word “necessarily” changes the entire tone, pushing the mind toward causality when it may or may not exist.

Consider the following two statements from a doctor to a patient:

1) The blood test results do not imply cancer.

2) The blood test results do not *necessarily* imply cancer.
Which one scares you more?

The article then goes on to suggest other factors that might be related to causality, but the harsh reality is that it’s too late for most readers, the message of causality has already penetrated the anxious parent’s mind adobe illustrator cs2 gratis downloaden. You can fact check the day after a political debate, but it’s too late. You can tell a jury to disregard previous statements made by counsel, but it’s too late. Timing on these studies is everything: the scary part comes first, *then* the qualifiers. This is dangerous and irresponsible.

So if this piece is nebulous and misleading in any way, what can we take from an article such as this video herunterladen android app. You may draw one, and only one reasonable conclusion:

In one study involving a select group of 12 year olds, there is a *link* between vape/hookah use and use of marijuana two years later. The nature of that link is unclear in any meaningful way. Maybe that link will become clear with more research, maybe not.

Note that I say *one* study downloading apps does not work. When issues regarding human behavior are studied, you should assume that, for every study confirming a hypothesis, there is at least one study that either does not support that hypothesis, and perhaps one that refutes (which may or may not be published). That is what makes psychology so fascinating/frustrating: human experience is so incredibly difficult to isolate and quantify, which is why one study means very little and why, very often, replicating a previous finding is quite difficult datev installation herunterladen.

What you can NOT take from this study or article, no matter how much you and CNN might want to is, unfortunately, what most people will conclude:

Hookha/vape use causes teens to eventually smoke weed.



(Visited 367 times, 1 visits today)

2 Responses to “Welcome Back”

  1. ? says:

    So why aren’t the comments on the forums updating? Last update on the most popular thread was February.

  2. Lynn says:

    I’m so glad that you’re back writing! Please keep it up and don’t fall off the face of the earth again!