Stan Young, junk epidemiology debunker, get’s applause

This essay by Pomeroy reminds us of the value of Stan Young’s work. Why all these epidemiology studies are so unreliable when they trumpet assertions based on small associations.

One of Jim Enstrom’s persecutors, and a prominent junk scientist for the American Cancer Society, is quoted here, admitting that small associations and false positive claims are too common in this world of publication bias. But the problem is that one of Thun’s biggest crusades, on second hand smoke,s is exhibit one for cheating in epidemiology with cancer claims that came from small association results in observational studies.

Troubling to see the hypocricy and “lying for justice.”

I also remind you of John Ioannides’ similar debunking of bad research disussed here at JS.

Archive on epidemiology:

Archive on Ioannides:


4 responses to “Stan Young, junk epidemiology debunker, get’s applause


    Everyone should bookmark Dr Grimes website.


    Commercials are out as a precursor to announcing the new therapies and the commercials clearly state smoking is not THE cause of lung cancer.

    Global warming skeptics are vilified for saying anything other than you have lung cancer because you smoke. Their skepticism is compared to the “deniers” of tobacco research. Yet here we have it—it’s not the cigarettes and it’s not your fault. When can we expect an apology from the global warming advocates concerning all those straw man arguments and nastiness about not believing tobacco was evil?

  3. Where is the link to Pomeroy’s essay?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s