Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

Science journal thinks smoking can "erase" your Y chromosome

Good evening everyone,

Yet another feeble study somehow ended up in a reputable journal, and the mass media jumped on it for another cheap shot at people's anxious gender identity... This is why this is BS.

What do you think?

Scroll to see replies

Utter bull****

Original post by bittr n swt

Utter bull****

Sadly, yes. Does it make you lose faith in science when such crap is publicised?!

Reply 3

tibis

where's the link to the article and when in the video are the actual results of the correlation in difference of y chromosomes? also is that your video?

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 4

Pseudocode

Y does it think this?

Reply 5

bittr n swt

Original post by Flying Cookie

Sadly, yes. Does it make you lose faith in science when such crap is publicised?!

Yes.

Reply 6

green.tea

Just goes to show what sort of insidious agenda lies behind the smoking ban.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2039650/Sinister-thought-control-anti-smoking-lobby.html

Reply 7

Puddles the Monkey

Good thing I don't have one.

Guess that means it's safe for me to smoke now! :awesome:

Reply 8

Puddles the Monkey

Original post by Flying Cookie

What do you think?

Don't know if you've seen this, but it is related: http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/nov/25/journal-accepts-paper-requesting-removal-from-mailing-list

What journal was the Y-chromosone/smoking paper published in...?

Reply 9

green.tea

Original post by Puddles the Monkey

Good thing I don't have one.

Guess that means it's safe for me to smoke now! :awesome:

Reply 10

Birkenhead

Original post by green.tea

Just goes to show what sort of insidious agenda lies behind the smoking ban.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2039650/Sinister-thought-control-anti-smoking-lobby.html

Hear hear. Doctors being paid by the anti smoking brigade is the biggest scandal we've never heard about.

Reply 11

Puddles the Monkey

Original post by green.tea

This graph is totally confusing. What does the blue line even mean? :zomg:

Reply 12

green.tea

Original post by Puddles the Monkey

This graph is totally confusing. What does the blue line even mean? :zomg:

It's the smoking rate. Unsurprisingly this information isn't very well publicised.

Here's a site that tries to argue that the increased cancer rate is actually still due to smoking.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/2001/highlights/ataglance/

It doesn't have a graph showing the decline in the number of female smokers. :s-smilie:

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 13

SiminaM

LOL this is ridiculous.

Reply 14

Puddles the Monkey

Original post by green.tea

It's the smoking rate. Unsurprisingly this information isn't very well publicised.

Here's a site that tries to argue that the increased cancer rate is actually still due to smoking.

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/sgr/2001/highlights/ataglance/

It's difficult to tell what the reasons might be just from a graph - you'd have to read all the literature and make a conclusion. :holmes:

Although it would make sense that the lung cancer rate would go up several years after the peak in smoking rates- smoking related cancer comes later in life. :holmes:

Reply 15

green.tea

Original post by Puddles the Monkey

It's difficult to tell what the reasons might be just from a graph - you'd have to read all the literature and make a conclusion. :holmes:

Although it would make sense that the lung cancer rate would go up several years after the peak in smoking rates- smoking related cancer comes later in life. :holmes:

Yeah..

Here's a graph that thinks smoking started in 1900.

Reply 16

Puddles the Monkey

Original post by green.tea

Yeah..

Here's a graph that thinks smoking started in 1900.

This graph also makes my brain hurt :frown:

What is your angle on this? :beard:

Reply 17

Ggmu!

There should be some regulation on reporting scientific news. Seriously does, the level of misinformation and misrepresentation of results our paper report are astro-****ing-nomical.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 18

Flying Cookie

Original post by Ggmu!

Exactly. This is not just a random ****ty article though, it is SCIENCE, the #2 science journal in the world. They actually published this "study".

Reply 19

green.tea

Original post by Puddles the Monkey

This graph also makes my brain hurt :frown:

What is your angle on this? :beard:

That it's virtually impossible to know what the truth is unless you do your own research. As soon as science becomes dogmatic and/or tribalistic you may as well be getting your information from Timmy Mallet.