[at-l] Water Treatment Survey in American Journal of Medicine

[sloetoe at yahoo.com (Sloetoe)]

--- Quoleldil <quoleldil@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "The American Journal of Medicine" <http://www.amjmed.org/> 
> It does not appear to put its articles on line ...
> An abstract is available at Pub Med by searching for "boulware
> dr" or going to
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12681456&dopt=Abstract
> A more complete abstract is available at:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TDC-488FKJ1-6&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2003&_alid=90914167&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_qd=1&_cdi=5195&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=c02a8a62a6d3617a7709b1b334f461a9

<snip>
> The risk of diarrhea was greater among those who frequently
drank untreated water from streams or ponds (odds ratio [OR] =
7.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.7 to 23; P <0.0001),
whereas practicing "good hygiene" (defined as routine cleaning
of cooking utensils and cleaning hands after bowel movements)
was associated with a decreased risk (OR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.22 to
0.97; P =0.04)

### Ouch! You know, I feel lots better discussing things with
empirically-derived evidence -- *any* evidence -- I'm not scared
by small n size or attenuated confidence intervals... nah! And
this cite certainly qualifies as empirical.... but somebody
screwed the pooch here. Elsewise, I need to go buy a boatload of
lottery tickets. Long story short: there is NO WAY that an odds
ratio of 7.7 can fly, without leaving a bunch of hikers on this
list dead or running off to the potty (or to the mailbox with
our renewal to Flagyl Monthly). Anybody know what went wrong?

Sloetoe

=====
Spatior! Nitor! Nitor! Tempero!
   Pro Pondera Et Meliora.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com