Current Impactful Studies: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 13:23, 1 December 2020 view source4 years ago Alan Beard (talk \| contribs) Administrators, administrator, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, translator 213 edits No edit summary Tag: Visual edit: Switched ← Older edit		Revision as of 16:55, 1 December 2020 view source4 years ago Alan Beard (talk \| contribs) Administrators, administrator, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Suppressors, Administrators, translator 213 edits No edit summary Tag: Visual edit: Switched Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	These studies will have been recently published in the last few months, and rightly or wrongly receiving media attention. Negative media attention is by its very nature, vastly more common, as 'bad news travels or sells'. Some may be described as junk studies, but we must demonstrate why that is the the case in a Scientific logical manner,not just simply dismiss.		These studies will have been recently published in the last few months, and rightly or wrongly receiving media attention. Negative media attention is by its very nature, vastly more common, as 'bad news travels or sells'. Some may be described as junk studies, but we must demonstrate why that is the the case in a Scientific logical manner,not just simply dismiss.

			[https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2468-2667%2820%2930145-6 New Lancet Study: vaping is rare among individuals who have never smoked conventional cigarettes.]