alien Traveler" data-source="post: 16043419" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">Almost. But not quite the same in your analogy. Rather than changing from one health hazard to another with a totally different disease profile, it would be like changing from alcohol to an alcohol substitute that people were clamoring about causing exactly the same diseases as alcohol. So to do a comparison between vaping and smoking is very unlike a comparison between smoking and alcohol.alien Traveler said:?
Statistical analysis is more than that. It shows if you have any result or not.
I do not see any “tantalizing” information.
Let me use an analogy.
Suppose we have some non-smoking, but heavily drinking society. Suppose smoking was introduced as drinking cessation method. Suppose we have results of survey of 100 people for whom it worked, who smoked for 3 years instead of drinking.
Results:
1. Tremendous health improvements:
- No new cases of cirrhosis among smokers
- No alcoholic dementia cases among smokers
- No DUI casualities with involvement of smokers
2. No adverse health effects due to smoking, only 2 individuals reported some cough problems, but they could be explained by other means (yes, 3 years of smoking are not enough to develop visible health problems).
So, you see, your survey is on about the same level as my “survey”.
At the end of this analysis I plan on comparing the disease incident in vapers to the well known incidence of disease in the general population as tracked through the CDC and NIH. The general population will be the control group.