4 ms·

The title appears neutral, but I can't help but think "I've definitely been unwittingly poisoning myself" when I read it. But then in the findings it basically

The title appears neutral, but I can't help but think "I've definitely been unwittingly poisoning myself" when I read it. But then in the findings it basically says it's a complete non-issue. I wish they would have included the findings in the title, it feels like click-bait.

eganist 5y ago
> The title appears neutral, but I can't help but think "I've definitely been unwittingly poisoning myself" Probably because this abridged title isn't neutral (flagged accordingly). By simply stating "Lead exposure from [x]," the implication is that impactful exposure risk exists. The original title and even the condensed title (everything after the colon scrubbed) were both at least 18 characters too long, but a better abridgement of the title would've been "A pilot study to assess lead exposure from routine consumption from ceramic mugs" scrubbing the coffee/tea reference as the subject happens to be the mugs themselves
- smarx007 5y ago
  "An assessment of lead exposure from routine consumption of coffee and tea from ceramic mugs" should have been fine too.
  - eganist 5y ago
    True
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
smarx007 5y ago
There is an abstract in every academic paper and this paper had this bit in the abstract: "The estimated daily dose of lead exceeded the California Maximum Allowable Dose Level of 0.5 μg per day for one of the five mugs tested. Blood lead levels did not increase above regulatory or guidance values.". As others have written, "Blood lead levels did not increase" does not mean there is no long-term health problem, it was simply outside the scope of the publication. Academic paper titles are almost always describe what the paper is about, not what the conclusion is. Academics don't do frontloading, thankfully. Edit: to look into the title further, you can see that it starts with "A _pilot_ study". This can indicate that the sample size of 5 mugs was not a mistake and the main purpose of the paper is to get feedback on the methodology and a larger follow-up study may be underway and we shouldn't be deriving any (health-related) conclusions from this paper.
perl4ever 5y ago
>But then in the findings it basically says it's a complete non-issue As long as you don't live in California. That was my kneejerk reaction, and then I saw the response to your comment confirming I nailed it. Heck with reading the article.

eganist 5y ago

> The title appears neutral, but I can't help but think "I've definitely been unwittingly poisoning myself" Probably because this abridged title isn't neutral (flagged accordingly). By simply stating "Lead exposure from [x]," the implication is that impactful exposure risk exists. The original title and even the condensed title (everything after the colon scrubbed) were both at least 18 characters too long, but a better abridgement of the title would've been "A pilot study to assess lead exposure from routine consumption from ceramic mugs" scrubbing the coffee/tea reference as the subject happens to be the mugs themselves

smarx007 5y ago
"An assessment of lead exposure from routine consumption of coffee and tea from ceramic mugs" should have been fine too.
- eganist 5y ago
  True

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

smarx007 5y ago

There is an abstract in every academic paper and this paper had this bit in the abstract: "The estimated daily dose of lead exceeded the California Maximum Allowable Dose Level of 0.5 μg per day for one of the five mugs tested. Blood lead levels did not increase above regulatory or guidance values.". As others have written, "Blood lead levels did not increase" does not mean there is no long-term health problem, it was simply outside the scope of the publication. Academic paper titles are almost always describe what the paper is about, not what the conclusion is. Academics don't do frontloading, thankfully. Edit: to look into the title further, you can see that it starts with "A _pilot_ study". This can indicate that the sample size of 5 mugs was not a mistake and the main purpose of the paper is to get feedback on the methodology and a larger follow-up study may be underway and we shouldn't be deriving any (health-related) conclusions from this paper.

perl4ever 5y ago

>But then in the findings it basically says it's a complete non-issue As long as you don't live in California. That was my kneejerk reaction, and then I saw the response to your comment confirming I nailed it. Heck with reading the article.