Do you understand that medical journals are different from any random news source scoured off of the internet?
The authors of the Lausanne study state, in their paper, that "most" sudden cardiac deaths of young athletes aren't reported to these journals - which were the only ones the authors considered.
Goodsciencing.com, on the other hand, cast a very wide net.
"This means that provided a person is reasonably fit, healthy and does some athletic activity, rather than an unfit “couch potato,” then they can be included in this list. Needless to say, these are only the persons reported to us by readers or that we discovered during research. Also note that almost all of these have been reported in the media."
You didn't answer my earlier question but do you think it's honest to compare a very select number of cases written up in select medical journals to a random collection of deaths pulled from all over the internet?
honest
//
. snikker
Semi worries about “ honest”
Bwa haha ha.
The Lausanne study searched a very wide net using the following resources.
"Medline (OVID Web, 1966–2004), PubMed (1966–2004), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EBM Reviews – ACP Journal Club, Cinahl (1982–2004), Heracles, Web of Science, Scopus (1960–2004)."
Some of those are databases and databases of databases. Seems like a pretty thorough search to me.
You're going to tell me that a search of all of those scientific references and databases is going to find less real cases of heart related SCD than what was compiled in the article in question??