The problem with a lot modern science is that you're dealing with a virtually infinite numbers of variables both environmentally, behaviourally and genetically.
Short of having a thousand identical twins locked up in a room from birth you're swimming against a very strong tide. Long gone are the days when science was as simple as castrating a rooster and grafting his balls back: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Adolph_Berthold
Wouldn't taking these kind of factors into account be quite basic part of the analysis?
They acknowledge that they are just looking at the number of prescriptions and that the research doesn't show that the drugs themselves were reducing people's risk.
It could equally be the amount of sex that is reducing the risk.
Comments
Wouldn't taking these kind of factors into account be quite basic part of the analysis?
Of course, they cannot take everything into account.
The problem with a lot modern science is that you're dealing with a virtually infinite numbers of variables both environmentally, behaviourally and genetically.
Short of having a thousand identical twins locked up in a room from birth you're swimming against a very strong tide. Long gone are the days when science was as simple as castrating a rooster and grafting his balls back: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Adolph_Berthold
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis
They acknowledge that they are just looking at the number of prescriptions and that the research doesn't show that the drugs themselves were reducing people's risk.
It could equally be the amount of sex that is reducing the risk.
Well, unless you lead a non-active life and hope to improve your health by taking viagra without the accompanying extra in activity.