Critical Scientists - Revision history

Mamoune: /* Fox, R. Michael */

2016-12-14T04:22:10Z

Fox, R. Michael

2016-12-13T05:11:05Z

Snel, Jan

2016-12-13T05:07:21Z

Ropohl, Günter

2016-12-13T05:05:42Z

Phillips, Carl V.

2016-12-13T05:01:26Z

Levy, Robert A

2016-12-13T04:57:27Z

Kabat, Geoffrey C.

2016-12-13T04:54:23Z

Jenkins, Roger A.

2016-12-13T04:52:26Z

Grieshaber, Romano

2016-12-13T04:36:37Z

Gori, Gio Batta

2016-12-13T04:26:45Z

Dunbar, Ian

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:22, 14 December 2016
Line 158:		Line 158:

	*Source: [http://records.co.hawaii.hi.us/Weblink8/0/doc/17329/Page54.aspx Toxic Toxicology - Placing Scientific Credibility At Risk ]		*Source: [http://records.co.hawaii.hi.us/Weblink8/0/doc/17329/Page54.aspx Toxic Toxicology - Placing Scientific Credibility At Risk ]
		+	*Source: [http://www.nycclash.com/smoke_chart.html The Dose Makes The Poison ]

	=== Frenk, Hanan ===		=== Frenk, Hanan ===

@@ Line 419: / Line 419: @@
 * To deprive people from pleasure, and by that harm their mental health, is morally reprehensible.</blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.data-yard.net/brussels_speeches/snel.pdf Smoking bans and mental health]
+*Source: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-Wn_TI7WgM Smoking bans and mental health]
 === Stadler, Beda ===

@@ Line 335: / Line 335: @@
 <blockquote>- Angestachelt von pseudowissenschaftlichen Vorurteilen. (Motivated by pseudo-scientific prejudices.)</blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.novo-argumente.com/artikel/95/novo9551.pdf "Passivrauchen" als statistisches Konstrukt]
+*Source: [https://www.novo-argumente.com/artikel/print_novo95_51 "Passivrauchen" als statistisches Konstrukt]
 === Schrauzer, N. Gerhard ===

@@ Line 327: / Line 327: @@
 <blockquote>- If research on smoking cessation was a science, rather than being a marketing and political activity, the overwhelming evidence that NRT [Nicotine Replacement Therapy] does not work would have led to the rejection of a hypothesis.</blockquote>
-* Source: [http://ep-ology.blogspot.com/ Unhealthful News 213 - More on "addiction", and understanding why NRT does not work]
+* Source: [http://ep-ology.blogspot.ca/2012/04/unhealthful-news-213-more-on-addiction.html Unhealthful News 213 - More on "addiction", and understanding why NRT does not work]
 ===Ropohl, Günter ===

@@ Line 249: / Line 249: @@
 </blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.data-yard.net/science/articles/lies.pdf Lies, Damned Lies and 400,000 Smoking-Related Deaths]
+*Source: [http://www.forces-nl.org/artikelen/lies.pdf Lies, Damned Lies and 400,000 Smoking-Related Deaths]
 === Little, Kitty ===

@@ Line 224: / Line 224: @@
 <blockquote>- A doctrine is built up that is antithethical to the openness that is a precondition for scientific discourse. What is objectionable is that voluminous and authoritative-appearing reports convey the message that passive smoking is a major cause of fatal disease, which few scientists believe to be the case.</blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.hypinghealthrisks.com/index.html Hyping Health Risks: The Controversy Over Passive Smoking, page 175]
+*Source: [https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/hyping-health-risks/ Hyping Health Risks: The Controversy Over Passive Smoking, page 175]
 *Source: [http://www.bmj.com/content/326/7398/1057 Environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality in a prospective study of Californians, 1960-98]

@@ Line 201: / Line 201: @@
 <blockquote>- Scientists must never tinker with their science just because they don’t like the outcome of their data. Just because you find cigarette smoking annoying doesn’t mean you should cherry-pick your data so that you can prove a health risk.</blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.ornl.gov/info/press_releases/get_press_release.cfm?ReleaseNumber=mr20000203-00 Exposures to second-hand smoke lower than believed, ORNL study finds]
+*Source: [https://www.ornl.gov/news/exposures-second-hand-smoke-lower-believed-ornl-study-finds Exposures to second-hand smoke lower than believed, ORNL study finds]
 *Source: [http://www.ornl.gov/info/reporter/no11/bad.htm Researcher says antismoking policies, though admirable, shouldn’t be based on hazy science]
 *Source: [http://lubbockonline.com/stories/020405/med_280798.shtml Researcher questions: how bad is secondhand smoke]

@@ Line 185: / Line 185: @@
 (- The scientific debate about secondhand smoke has wrongly been declared concluded. I call on the experts, but also the interested public, to revisit the question on the basis of facts. I hope my book will stimulate debate.)</blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.freiheit-toleranz.de/page.php?id=87 Das Interview – Passivrauchen-Götterdämmerung der Wissenschaft]
+*Source: [http://www.tageswoche.ch/de/2012_37/schweiz/458025/passivrauchen-schadet-nicht.htm Passivrauchen schadet nicht ]
 *Source: [http://www.grieshabers-passivrauchen.de/ Passivrauchen: Götterdämmerung der Wissenschaft]

@@ Line 174: / Line 174: @@
 odious and socially unfair prohibitions. </blockquote>
-*Source: [http://www.data-yard.net/brussels_speeches/gori.pdf The Fraud of Environmental Tobacco Smoke Risks ]
+*Source [https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/regulation/2007/3/v30n1-5.pdf Stoking the Rigged Terror of Secondhand Smoke ]
 === Grieshaber, Romano ===

@@ Line 97: / Line 97: @@
 <blockquote>- Researchers still do not know precisely how, or indeed whether, smoking causes cancer or any of the other diseases attributed to it; they have struggled with weird and wonderful experiments to try and produce tumours in laboratory animals and failed dismally. The chemicals in tobacco smoke are similar to those in traffic fumes, except that in traffic fumes the concentration is much higher; cigarette smoke is therefore less toxic than the air we ordinarily breathe. </blockquote>
-*Source: [http://freedom-2-choose.blogspot.ca/2009/11/smoke-screens-truth-about-tobacco.html Smoke Screens: The Truth About Tobacco ]
+*Source: [https://books.google.ca/books?id=YAldAgAAQBAJ&pg=PP7&lpg=PP7&dq=Researchers+still+do+not+know+precisely+how,+or+indeed+whether,+smoking+causes+cancer+or+any+of+the+other+diseases+attributed+to+it;&source=bl&ots=1kUwC9R0M8&sig=a95f0e5nKvk5zPPpu4AMTgLKCP4&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwisrPbTqfDQAhVhrlQKHft3CUYQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=Researchers%20still%20do%20not%20know%20precisely%20how%2C%20or%20indeed%20whether%2C%20smoking%20causes%20cancer%20or%20any%20of%20the%20other%20diseases%20attributed%20to%20it%3B&f=false Smoke Screens: The Truth About Tobacco ]
 *Video: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7R8rQQXxCk ] Tobacco - Some Facts ]