I'd treat that criticism with a pinch of salt. Of course they used higher levels to prove the pathway.
If they used a lower limit and found no evidence, it could be down to low probability - after all if you took a survey of smokers without differentiating between occaisional, light and heavy users, most of them wouldn't die of lung cancer. Small comfort for the ones that do.
First show the causation, then work from there.
What is key to this result is the fact that it is the cocktail effect that kills, not the level of round-up per se.
If they used a lower limit and found no evidence, it could be down to low probability - after all if you took a survey of smokers without differentiating between occaisional, light and heavy users, most of them wouldn't die of lung cancer. Small comfort for the ones that do.
First show the causation, then work from there.
What is key to this result is the fact that it is the cocktail effect that kills, not the level of round-up per se.
Comment