Correlation does not equal causation.
Before we had ‘Science’, we had ‘Common Sense’. It seems to have stood us well in many respects for centuries, and sometimes a correlation that is recognized actually DOES intimate a cause.
There may be a lot of influences contributing to the individual propensity for violence. But I’m personally not convinced that we really know enough yet to be playing around with brain chemistry in the ways that we have been doing.
However, I would not describe it so simply and harmless (relatively speaking)
With the huge increase in the number of people using SSRI's, that very small percentage starts to become a large number of people...
True but it is a reason to explore further.
It should be looked in to how many of these Rampage Killers were under a doctors care and if it can be discovered were they on anti-depressants.
Precisely. We could write clickbait all day long on silly correlations.
“Women wearing blue on Wednesdays more apt to have traffic collisions”.
We need a study in which the correlation rises to the level of statistical significance. Then we need good replication studies, controlling for various variables that could be impinging on the subjects.
Then, you’ll have something.
>Correlation does not equal causation.
And platitudes do not equal facts.
What is the fancy statistical phrase for when the correlation coefficient approaches 1 (i.e. 100%), then what is indicated?