New Study : Proximity to Frakking Increases Birth Defects!

Of course, champions of frakking will try to deny this, like all other science that clearly shows frakking as very harmful, but here's a brand new scientific study just released.

"Conclusions:
In this large cohort, we observed an association between density and proximity of
natural gas wells within a 10-mile radius of maternal residence and prevalence of CHDs and
possibly
NTDs.
Greater specificity in exposure estimates are needed to further explore these
associations."

These are our unborn at risk. This is very troubling. Why not just build some solar panels in the SW desert, one of the most viable places in the world? Clean and safe.

Of course, non-scientist government spokesmen will step up to the podium to insist frakking is perfectly safe, and they might issue some psuedo-scientific "report" (not the same thing as a peer-reviewable study) to say the same, but it's about time you people stopped being duped. They OBVIOUSLY have a conflict of interest. These same politicians are bribed by the dirty energy companies.

The United States Government Incorporated have been poisoning Americans for decades just for corporate profits; it's about time we put a stop to that!!!

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/wp-content/uploads/122/1/ehp.1306722.pdf

 

Those Frakking champions........They prolly use BBQ sauce on their puppies too.

Everyone knows they need ketchup.

 

I'm disappointed. I thought this had something to do with the "Frak" word from Battlestar Galactica.
Enjoy!

 

So now libs care about the unborn?

 

Who said I'm a lib? I do care about the unborn and I am pro-life.

What's your opinion about the topic? Is frakking still worthwhile?

 

Why would you put ketchup on your desert? Use frosting.

 

Why would you put frosting on a desert?

 

ridiculous. What a stretch. Libs will do anything to shut down natural resource industry....even in the guise of protecting the unborn. How ironic.

 

You've read the study and have some peer review to share? And how do you know its authors are libs?

 

It is making its way into the food chain. Cows drink contaminated water; you eat cow; you be frackled.

 

Nope. I don't. But I know the hype when I see it. Perhaps if the industry wasn't so....discredible...then people would take it at face value. I have better things to do.

 

Nice to see someone so concerned about the unborn. Of course, I'm sure the average unborn would rather be next to a frakking well than a Planned Parenthood office.

 

The #1 rule of statistical analysis:

Correlation does not imply causation.
Correlation does not imply causation.
Correlation does not imply causation.

For you laymen, what that means is that even if the results are accurate and women who live close to frakking have babies with more birth defects, it does not mean that the frakking is causing the birth defects. The study, by its own admission, did not adjust for socioeconomic status of the subjects. I'd say that's a pretty big one to leave out, wouldn't you?

 

When you read things like "association" in a scientific study that means there appears to be a correlation which of course DOES NOT mean causation, nor does it prove causation in any way shape or form.

If you're going to quote a scientific study, learn how to read them first.

 

LOL Science is a LIE. Frakking is PERFECTLY NATURAL. Even the cavemen were FRAKKERS.

- - - Updated - - -

LOL Science is a LIE. Frakking is PERFECTLY NATURAL. Even the cavemen were FRAKKERS.

 

Science is dis-credible to you?

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you. I wish more were.

 

Not on its own. You have to read on through the additional methodology to see how variables are accounted for. You didn't read the study, did you?

- - - Updated - - -

Cavemen made chemical solutions to fire deep underground to fracture the Earth's crust to extract natural gas? Really? Evidence of this? Is that how they made their campfire?

 

You have to read on for the additional methodology.. How does low socioeconomic class lead to birth defects? What's outside average about the sample area?

 

Really, brah? Really? You don't think people in lower socioeconomic classes receive poorer health care, and therefore would have more prenatal difficulties? I'm going to ask you the same question you've asked others: You didn't actually read the study, did you?

On page 14, the study itself says "Our incomplete ability to adjust for socioeconomic status, health, nutrition, prenatal care, and pregnancy complications likely accounts for these unexpected findings" and also "our incomplete ability to adjust for socioeconomic status, health, nutrition, prenatal care, and pregnancy complications may have resulted in residual confounding." (I would wager every cent I own that you don't even know what a confounding variable is)

The study's own conclusion says we need more "comprehensive and rigorous research." Not once do the authors of this study claim - or even imply - that the frakking has caused the birth defects.

For someone lecturing others on the scientific method, you sure don't seem terribly well informed about it yourself.

 

It would explain the growing number of kids born hideously mutated, such as this one:

 

Prove they didn't.

Check mate, lib.

- - - Updated - - -

You mean blacks? That's pretty racist.

 

The study clearly states association.

Do you understand that association does not mean cause and effect?

Much like the association between cell phone and brain tumors which was identified in the early 90s. Or the association between high tension power lines and cancer which caused a scare in the 90s as well.

You think those associations panned out into anything?

 

But the fracking is maybe saving us a dime at the gas pump. Don't you think it is worth it?

It never amazes me how selfish people are and greedy.

 

Science used for political agenda and gain....is discredible.