insaintee

In that case there are no facts. In fact there are no facts in science hence you get climate change deniers and the like

Still hurting from being made to look an ass. My suggestion is stop acting like an ass.

It implys causatiion. https://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/life-sciences/ecology-and-conservation/cause-and-correlation-biology-users-guide-path-analysis-structural-equations-and-causal-inference-r-2nd-edition?format=PB Either 1. It's a statistical artifact (which should not be the case if statisical tests are applied) 2 There is a spurious relationship. A third factor is controling both factors (should not be the case if a proper controls are included in design e,g. in a multi-variate regression model. 3. There is a indirect relationship. Which means that a third variable sits between to the two others in the system and that variance in the control variable influences the intermediate variable which in turn influences the output varible. (in effect this is just the same as a direct relationship) 4, A direct relationship. Good too see you recognising the limits of the scientific method

I also refer you to the paper supplied earlier.

Yes it is. If people have conducted Case control and cohort studies that is evidence

To be a RC experiment yes, Or you could do case control study. (which is what happens) almost as soon as you involve people you cannot do a RC experiement.

Then f**k off there is good evidence as per the paper cited. The lack of RCE is not the same as lack of evidence .

Not at all If you look at NICE guidelines to assessing literature as evidence Randomised Controlled experiements are actually the leve weakest evidence. I know this is not what you are taught at as undergraduate. But the point is about the universal application of the evidence to the entire population. As a result very few RC experiements are conducted, and none on human populations where case control and/or cohort studies are much more comment There is no need nor benefit from RC experiments in this case, or indeed in the majority of medical studies. example. A RC experiment in vitro shows that drug A cures cancer. This will not be released until a case control study is carried out because the case control study give superior quality of evidence. https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg6/chapter/reviewing-the-evidence

Uttter rubbish Really, you try getting an ethic committee to agree to infecting people with Covid-19

FFS yes they do.

There will never be any randomised controlled experiments conducted on mask effectiveness as you would only use infected individuals, and that means you cannot select your groups at random.

Not at all, displaying your lack of knowledge of the scientific method a

Boris Johnston went to your shop?

Read it again

I have to say I'm all for being breastfed. 😎

You mean like this https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31142-9/fulltext

All discarded medical waste is marked and handled appropriately, what is your point?

You might be right.

Were we not quite strong defensively last season? our goals conceaded were about middle of the pack it was goal for that let us down.

I thought Callum came into a game and finnished the season quite well. I would not be dissappoint to see him back ON A FREE TRANSFER other than that no thanks. Does his killie contract not end soon anyway?

how will we live without them

Here is the National Registars of Scotland report that shows that is unlikely to be the case, and that most of the "Non-Covid Excess deaths" are likely to due to misdiagnosis. https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/vital-events/general-publications/weekly-and-monthly-data-on-births-and-deaths/deaths-involving-coronavirus-covid-19-in-scotland

More BS

Utter pish