[Gabz]

Unable to find significant faults in the UCLA study itself, critics repeatedly harped on what Enstrom and Kabat had clearly stated – that some of the funding was from the tobacco industry. As they explained, this became necessary when the University of California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program, which was specifically set up to support this type of research, stopped their funding and no other sources were available.

And the reason the funding was yanked out just 2 years before completion of the study was because the preliminary findings were already showing results the anti-smoker cartel DID NOT want.

As the article states - there has been no questioning of the science and scientific methods of the study so they had to find some reason to cover their behinds and so they attack the funding.

What the media fails to acknowledge when reporting stuff like this is that 95% of the funding of this study came from the American Cancer Society and subsequent anti-smoker organizations. Only 5% came from tobacco interests - and that occurred only AFTER the research was nearly complete and preliminary results already determined.

[Publius6961]

And the reason the funding was yanked out just 2 years before completion of the study was because the preliminary findings were already showing results the anti-smoker cartel DID NOT want.

Well their tired cliche that studies always reflect the position of the entity paying for it remains unchallenged. Isn't that cute?
Clarifies the abuse of statistics perfectly.

We can't allow the continued abuse of science!

[CSM]

I see you are trying to recruit CSW to our side. I wonder if that is a long lost relative of mine!

[SheLion]

Thanks for the ping, Gabz. I have to read this in a few.