The conclusion "Diabetes increases your risk of glaucoma", is unfounded. It assumes the same wrongs the pharmaceutical industry and epidemiologists are rightly accused of: association does not equal causation; and, results from one sample even of a few thousand cannot be taken as being necessarily representative of the 7 bil…
The conclusion "Diabetes increases your risk of glaucoma", is unfounded. It assumes the same wrongs the pharmaceutical industry and epidemiologists are rightly accused of: association does not equal causation; and, results from one sample even of a few thousand cannot be taken as being necessarily representative of the 7 billion of us. Merely analysing data (versus conducting a RCT) has not proven cause, (either that diabetes causes glaucoma, nor that diabetes causes an increase in glaucoma rates), merely suggested an association.
A correctly qualified conclusion:
"Diabetes appeared (past tense; based on one relatively tiny sample and snapshot in time) to be associated with (not necessarily causative of) an increased risk of glaucoma."
Correction. .
The conclusion "Diabetes increases your risk of glaucoma", is unfounded. It assumes the same wrongs the pharmaceutical industry and epidemiologists are rightly accused of: association does not equal causation; and, results from one sample even of a few thousand cannot be taken as being necessarily representative of the 7 billion of us. Merely analysing data (versus conducting a RCT) has not proven cause, (either that diabetes causes glaucoma, nor that diabetes causes an increase in glaucoma rates), merely suggested an association.
A correctly qualified conclusion:
"Diabetes appeared (past tense; based on one relatively tiny sample and snapshot in time) to be associated with (not necessarily causative of) an increased risk of glaucoma."