When I heard about the report about organic food being no better than conventional food, I knew right away that it either had to be flawed or that it was funded by an entity that had ulterior motives. One example that I can remember to illustrate this common practice is when I read a report that stated soy consumption caused heart disease. Upon further research, I discovered that the study was funded by the National Cattlemen's Beef Association. Since I took basic statstics, advanced statistics and methodology in undergrad school for my Bachelor of Science in Psychology and conducted many studies and research for my Master's thesis, I knew firsthand how and why many studies can be inherently flawed, invalid and/or biased as a result of the researcher.
The following articles discuss some reasons why this study is considered to be flawed. Click Here: Organic Versus Conventional Food: UK Report Flawed
and Click Here: UK Report Misleading
and Click Here: Don't Believe Everything You Hear and Read: UK Study is Flawed
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment