On 23/10/2018 19:19, p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 17:32:14 +0100, Norman Wells
wrote:

On 23/10/2018 12:29, p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 12:11:32 +0100, Norman Wells
wrote:

On 23/10/2018 12:02, p-0''0-h the cat (coder) wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 11:49:28 +0100, Norman Wells
wrote:

The point about science is that it establishes the truth. It may be
'bleeding obvious' to you that eating organic will prevent you being
sick or prematurely dead, but science, sadly, does not support you in
that belief.

Yeah, bet you said that about smoking, lead in petrol, paint .. the list
is endless.

The people who said that, many years ago incidentally, all had a vested
interest. As regards organic food, there are masses of independent
scientific studies by those with no axe to grind, none of which show any
significant advantage tastewise or healthwise of organic produce over
the equivalent conventional goods.

Show me one that studied 70,000 volunteers.

The numbers are irrelevant if the study does not include a control
group. It's unscientific, probably self-selecting, and no valid
conclusions can be drawn from it. Too many other factors are in play
that have not been eliminated.

You need to learn a bit about scientific method.

You presented no proof of the methods used in this study. You made all
that up.

There's plenty enough to be going on with in the Reuters report:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-he...-idUKKCN1MW23D

If you want the full article:

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2707948

You should read the limitations set out in both, because effectivley
they consign the study to the dustbin.

You haven't studied this at all Norman because you missed the real
biggie that there was correlation between this study and other studies
and incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and pesticide use. Wow wee! Yes
Norman, did you deliberately miss this because it's obviously very
interesting in light of the recent case about Monsanto's Roundup and
non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Why did you miss this Norman? Stay sharp Norman
because there are cats about. Your lack of attention to detail will be
exposed.

Anyway, considering this huge omission we can safely conclude that your
critique is worthless.

No because if you follow the link to the actual study at:

https://www.nature.com/articles/bjc2014148

you'll find:

"Conclusions:
In this large prospective study there was little or no decrease in the
incidence of cancer associated with consumption of organic food, except
possibly for non-Hodgkin lymphoma."

So, no proof of any reduced cancer risk at all, certainly not 25% as in
the thread heading, and only an unproven 'possibility' as regards
non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

It's not very impressive, is it?