4 ms·

Even if they didn’t or couldn’t control for certain factors it doesn’t mean that the study is useless. Familial history is likely not a good excuse since there

Even if they didn’t or couldn’t control for certain factors it doesn’t mean that the study is useless. Familial history is likely not a good excuse since there would be a very broad population even in a single branch. Behavioral factors are still very much relevant because you can use it for a public health policy, if smoking and drinking is worse in the military than in the general population then it’s something that you can definitely try to address. Another factor that can play here is that servicemen have probably better healthcare than the average population especially when it comes to preventative healthcare and checkups. So whilst this study isn’t enough to identify causation it’s enough for correlation which is quite often as important when it comes to public health policies.

QuarterReptile 4y ago
And, in any case, publishing an interesting but incomplete finding gives others the chance to pick up where this leaves off. >Another factor that can play here is that servicemen have probably better healthcare than the average population especially when it comes to preventative healthcare and checkups. Assuming that it is somewhat similar to the navy, the catastrophic and chronic stuff is very well covered (and no cost), but general screenings and physicals are no-value-add with a significant component of psychological harm.
ghufran_syed 4y ago
it’s funny you use the word “excuse” rather than “reason” or “cause” - it’s almost like you’ve already drawn a conclusion in the absence of any actual data… The point is there is no excuse NOT to consider those important factors - they are part of every annual physical and certainly part of the extensive screening done during enlistment. So you’d only ignore them if you’re trying to create a particular narrative, IMO

QuarterReptile 4y ago

And, in any case, publishing an interesting but incomplete finding gives others the chance to pick up where this leaves off. >Another factor that can play here is that servicemen have probably better healthcare than the average population especially when it comes to preventative healthcare and checkups. Assuming that it is somewhat similar to the navy, the catastrophic and chronic stuff is very well covered (and no cost), but general screenings and physicals are no-value-add with a significant component of psychological harm.

ghufran_syed 4y ago

it’s funny you use the word “excuse” rather than “reason” or “cause” - it’s almost like you’ve already drawn a conclusion in the absence of any actual data… The point is there is no excuse NOT to consider those important factors - they are part of every annual physical and certainly part of the extensive screening done during enlistment. So you’d only ignore them if you’re trying to create a particular narrative, IMO