Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (11348)	5/15/2006 10:22:30 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78416

I am with you on smoking and smoking guns. Dolphins seem to be disappearing. Whales are beaching with rare abandon. Song birds seem to be leaving the choir. Frogs are croaking all over the place. I have one for you. Some people like to spread the rumour that no matter how much/many DDT, antibiotics, hormones, other pesticides and herbicides are in meat and grains, that it won't hurt you because the amounts are small. Sounds like the JJ Reynolds tobacco argument. Cancer causes cancer, not cigarettes. It's a statistical spike, not a coffin nail. What Cancer and heart disease epidemic? users.rcn.com What would John Snow have said? For causation we may apply these rough principles. Although an association between two phenomena is no more than that, one can apply criteria to gauge the strength of the association, and if it is strong, infer that one phenomenon causes the other. The five criteria: * a high relative risk * consistency * a graded response to a graded dose * a temporal relationship * a plausible mechanism We have more sure evidence that smoke causes cancer from two historical sources. Bones of long dead indigenous peoples from the valley of the ten thousand smokes 30,000 years ago, and records of ages of death of Viking women, who did the cooking for their camps over open fires. The California natives died from cancer a great deal and lived to the average age of 30 years. The inversion layer and smog seemed to have shortened their lives markedly. Viking women died some 15 to 20 years earlier than their husbands from grave evidence, and that was from Cancer. Their job over smoky cooking fires cut their careers short one by one. There are two epidemics in North American living that are disturbing. Cancer and Heart Disease. These diseases are far less prevalant where a great distinction in diet can be made and no other genetic factors seem to be in play. The seeming multi factorial nightmare of elusive causation may be quite simple to test. It may boil down to in large part as to what is different about the vital substance ingestion (amine, vitamin, lipase, choline, and anti-oxidants sans complex non food hydrocarbons) of simple primitive diets and our western culture of refined and prepared food. To tie it fiendishly and gratuitously to the subject of this thread, I wonder if techniques to weasel trends out of graphs of stock data could be used to correlate disease or weather/climate with their causative factors and predict changes to trends indicated by changing factors within the equation? Could Bernstein's TA formulae find trends in medical charts? Fire up your Linux sub cluster matey and submerge to periscope depth. The attack on the Atlantic convoy carrying global warming factor, cigarettes, saturated fats, and carcinogens must begin. EC<:-}