New CDC Survey in the works

[AgentAnia]

To put the issue here into some kind of perspective, I believe (based on reviewing the CDC website) this questionnaire is used simply to select participants in the NATS (National Adult tobacco Survey) and NYTS (Nat'l Youth tobacco Survey).

That being said, remember that a whole industry exists that does nothing but craft survey questions for whoever pays their fee. Whether intentional or not, which words are used and how the questions are asked will inevitably affect the results.

The power of word choice in surveys and polls is similarly crucial. No one should ever pay any attention to any poll or survey results unless they've first seen exactly what wording is used in the questions, what population pool was sampled, and the size of the sample queried. "Four out of five dentists recommend Dentyne for dental health!" becomes far less compelling if one knows that the sample was limited only to dentists who actually recommended any brand of chewing gum for dental health!

Michael J. McFadden, Dissecting Antismokers' Brains, p. 60

 

[(So) Jersey Girl]

To put the issue here into some kind of perspective, I believe (based on reviewing the CDC website) this questionnaire is used simply to select participants in the NATS (National Adult tobacco Survey) and NYTS (Nat'l Youth Tobacco Survey).

That being said, remember that a whole industry exists that does nothing but craft survey questions for whoever pays their fee. Whether intentional or not, which words are used and how the questions are asked will inevitably affect the results.

I agree. I can understand excluding people who never smoked from a survey on adult tobacco use. I don't understand excluding former smokers. Who gets picked is just as important as the questions asked.

I predict the results will state that X # of people were sent the survey; X # responded (went to the website & answered the first couple of questions -some people will just toss the envelope in the trash) and then give % figures for the rest of the questions, giving the impression that a far greater # of people took the full survey. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[jpargana]

LOL... Oh man... I can see it now:

"100% of all eCig users who responded to our survey were dual users."

This reminds of another "study" made some time ago:

"The e-cig is NOT a good quitting method, bacause nearly 60% of people who call quit-lines have tried it - and obviously, failed"

Now, I would reach the same conclusion even if the e-cig had a 99% sucess rate, provided that 60% of the remaining 1% have used the e-cig, failed, and called a quit-line as a last resort.

I have never thought about calling a quit-line to tell them that I will not need any support after all, because I have managed to quit with e-cigarettes, thankyouverymuch... but maybe we should do just that, or else we will never show in these people's "statistics".

And strangely enough, they did no go one step further: if the e-cig is "innefective" because 60% of people calling quit-lines have tried it and failed, then they could have reasoned that Pharma NRT's are actually "completely useless BS", because nearly 100% of those same people have ALSO used them - "and obviously, failed".

Of course, NEITHER conclusion can be actually made from that study. But if they decided to "prove" the first, then, by their same twisted logic, we can "prove" the second.

 

[Stosh]

Lies, damn lies and statistics.