OK, so some chap decides to run a survey on people who live near a telecommunications tower. He finds out that there is a high incidence of cancer among these people. He then concludes that radiation from the telecommunications tower causes cancer...
This type of conclusion is premature. Correlation does not imply causality. Just because two incidents are related to each other, it does not mean that one caused the other. More study has to be done in order to ascertain the actual cause. There may be many factors which have positive or negative correlation, but perhaps only one factor which is the true cause of the situation.
For example, if a study is done on the air and water pollution levels, proliferation of MSG-laden food, low health consciousness and fitness levels, etc. there might also be correlation found. So is it then safe to say that these also caused the high incidence of cancer?
It's important to make the right conclusion based on the studies. Remember:
This type of conclusion is premature. Correlation does not imply causality. Just because two incidents are related to each other, it does not mean that one caused the other. More study has to be done in order to ascertain the actual cause. There may be many factors which have positive or negative correlation, but perhaps only one factor which is the true cause of the situation.
For example, if a study is done on the air and water pollution levels, proliferation of MSG-laden food, low health consciousness and fitness levels, etc. there might also be correlation found. So is it then safe to say that these also caused the high incidence of cancer?
It's important to make the right conclusion based on the studies. Remember:
Correlation does not imply causality
No comments:
Post a Comment