Replies

Looks like everybody got away from the study itself and went off on their own favorite rants.

What hasn't been broached yet is this statement from the article:

"In the United States, about 25 percent of children are exposed to environmental tobacco smoke in their own homes, yet more than 50 percent of children have detectable levels of cotinine in their blood, according to Dr. Yolton."

This is important for many reasons, but one is that of all the children in the study one half had measurable amounts of the tobacco marker and one half of that number did not live with adults who smoked so where did they get it?

Couldn't have been at school, smoking is not allowed. How about the neighbor's house? The authors chose to ignore this. Were they smoking themselves and thereby destroying the controls? The authors chose to ignore this as well.

Then there is this rather Alice in Wonderland reasoning:

Students who were hyperactive and tested positive for cotinine were said to have a behavioral disorder; those students who were very quiet and subdued and tested positive for cotinine were said to be suffering from depression, a disorder.

Now we have 50% of the control group that tested positive for cotinine while only 25% were in the constant company of adult smokers and we have half of the 50% diagnosed with hyperactivity and the other half diagnosed with depression and we still have 50% of the total control group with no reported behavioral traits whatsoever.

What we really have is no study at all, but we do have a big quarrel masquerading as argument.