Friday, 5 September 2014

UN WHO scientists are lying hounds - official

Scientists are generally quite polite to one another in print; one needs to translate what they say into normal speak. 

It is difficult to replicate this experiment = The results have been cooked
The data is potentially selective = They have ignored counter-evidence
The basis of the results is flawed = They are too stupid to understand what they were doing
and of course
The assumptions made are misleading = They're a bunch of lying hounds.

So when the BBC report this morning that
They carried out an analysis - published in the journal Addiction - of the WHO research which contributed to last week's report. They concluded that some of the assumptions WHO had made were "misleading".
You know what they really mean. 


Robert said...

Why is it that there is such a prejudice against E cigarettes?

Anonymous said...

"Why is it that there is such a prejudice against E cigarettes?"

Why is it there is such a prejudice against smoking?

Fixed that for you.

westcoast2 said...

Does 'Emerging evidence' mean - we did a small telephone survey, with leading questions, that agreed with us?

Anonymous said...

It is because the WHO are bent, like the rest of the UN, you have to remember a lot of its beaurocrats are third Worlders.
Bug Pharma wants E cigarettes off the menu, it competes with their patches and gum, a multi billion dollar industry, so they bribe officials to come up with the result they want.

visc said...

Ah, welcome to the world of corporate science so beloved of industry and universities. Selective data picking, cover up and loss of funding for those that don't tow the prevailing line. As they say 'science prigresses one funeral at a time'.

The word science should be abrogated as it is essentially meaningless as it's self styled guardians are usually charlatans with an agenda.

Anonymous said...

Patches, gum and e cigarettes allow 'smokers' to get their buzz without annoying us non-smokers with the acrid smoke. As such, they keep all sides of the equation happy, and banning them is simply a way of being a 'ban the buzz' busybody or equally, keeping the 'burning tobacco to make clouds of smoke' product viable to make money in a future world.

Weekend Yachtsman said...

You mean even the bbc said this?

Wow, things are changing.

Next up on bbc, "Global Warming not as certain as we thought"?

Maybe that's a bit hopeful.