[presidio9]

What is NOT accepted---nor true---is the researchers' assumption that "twins, having been raised in the same household, would have environmental experiences that were highly concordant."

Nobody is exactly the same, but twins have the closest enviornmental experience, and are therefore accepted as the best subjects for these types of studies. And I think that we can agree that 311 pairs is a relevant sample. And when the study found that users of marijuana before the age of 17 had a 2.3- to 3.9-fold increase in the odds of other drug use, we can reasonably conclude that the study had discovered a significant behavioral pattern. Your rebuttal was irrelevant because twins studies are already widely accepted. I'm sure you wish they weren't (THEY PROVE YOU ARE WONG), but they are.

bump

[PaxMacian]

I have identical twins in my family and I can tell you that they are the most competitive and contrasted members of a rather large family. The two have gone in opposite directions like magnets repulsing each other. No doubt that if you choose sets of twins that take opposite directions in life that they will retain those directions throughout most of their lives. This is the only fact that can be derived from this obviously bogus study.

[MrLeRoy]

What is NOT accepted---nor true---is the researchers' assumption that "twins, having been raised in the same household, would have environmental experiences that were highly concordant."

Nobody is exactly the same, but twins have the closest enviornmental experience, and are therefore accepted as the best subjects for these types of studies.

You're babbling---twin studies have NOTHING to do with closeness of enviornmental experience; in fact, twin studies often involve twins raised separately.

But feel free to keep parading your ignorance for our amusement.

Bump.