"Substantially strengthen the association" is NOT THE SAME AT ALL as "see their risk of gullet cancer rise by 90 percent" (Also, lol, gullet cancer is a great name)
-
Show this thread
-
Why are the authors so cautious Maybe it's because TEA DRINKING IS SUPER SOCIAL AND HARD TO UNPICK FROM CONFOUNDERS It's in caps because GODDAM IT I SAY THIS EVERY WEEKpic.twitter.com/GUAQyTAYof
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
We can't exclude residual confounding. Maybe people drink tea differently in different social situations. Maybe hot tea is more often served with alcohol. Maybe a single measure of how hot people drink their tea isn't that great a predictor 10 years later when they get cancer
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
Maybe there are a million factors you can never measure, and never control for, and thus it's really hard to know if this is causal or not Maybe
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
So the authors are cautious. They know that there's a decent chance that the heat of your tea has nothing to do with risk of esophageal cancer But the newspaper needs a story And so we get "hot tea causes cancer"pic.twitter.com/g6kancVrKs
2 replies 3 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
So, let's recap: Large epi study showed 0.34% absolute increase in risk of cancer associated with drinking the hottest tea compared to cold tea, in large amounts, every day for 10 years Reverse causality and residual confounding remain an issue
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
Do we trust these results? Well, yes. The study was interesting, and well done Do we think hot tea = cancer?
8 replies 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
Your enthusiasm to dismiss the research is notable but there is a reasonably comprehensive body of evidence, to which this research has added, showing that hot drinks do increase cancers. As there is no real benefit from very hot drinks why take the risk? http://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-research-on-hot-tea-and-oesophageal-cancer/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Alan_Watson_
What an odd response. There are a number of criticisms of the media attention of research above, it's a bit insulting to call that dismissive and a bit hypocritical - although I'm sure not intended - to dismiss it all yourself
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @GidMK
You dismiss it, inter alia, by your conclusion poll offering only options contrary to the conclusions of the research. How do I dismiss it? I simply note, as a matter of fact, the study does not reach those conclusions in isolation & suggest "better safe than sorry" in that light
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
You're putting words in my mouth. Please point to where I said the authors of the study itself - as opposed to the Daily Mail piece - were anything other than appropriately cautious given the relative difficulty in determining causation using this methodology
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
Objectively the
@MailOnline reporting was (perhaps unusually!) closer to the scientific consensus represented by IARC - that hot drinks "probably cause cancer of the oesophagus in humans" - than your final poll which denies that option even as a choice:pic.twitter.com/cbLbHNLW7L
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Alan_Watson_ @MailOnline
Ah, I see the issue herepic.twitter.com/yVe0K6ZNKh
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.