From the study - literally who funded, the role that played and precisely explaining the exclusions. Yay science!
Primary Funding Source:
Novo Nordisk Foundation and Danish Ministry of Health.
Role of the Funding Source
The study was supported by a grant from the Novo Nordisk Foundation and the Danish Ministry of Health. The funder of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. Dr. Hviid had full access to all of the data in the study and had overall responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.
Results
We identified 663 236 children born to Danish-born mothers from 1 January 1999 through 31 December 2010 (Figure 1). We excluded 5775 children; 1498 had no registration in the Danish Medical Birth Registry, and 4277 were unavailable for follow-up at study entry (1 year of age) because of death (n = 2673), emigration (n = 770), unexplained disappearance from the source registers (n = 203), an autism diagnosis (n = 11), or an exclusionary diagnosis (n = 620). This resulted in a study cohort of 657 461 children contributing 5 025 754 person-years of follow-up during 1 January 2000 through 31 August 2013.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB_AOL
I take both with a grain of salt.
Sure "some guy on youtube" might be pushing their opinions and possibly lying, but that's no different than a study.
Let me speak your language, It's kind of like winter tire tests.. isn't it funny how most tests are won by the sponsoring tire? I'm sure that has nothing to do with the test (conditions) being done to ensure the sponsors tire wins.. or that the tire manufacturer put up $100k for the test (or directly to the tester's pocket).
Was it an unbiased study? Why were ~6000 kids excluded? Where do you think that institute got the money to do the research?
Data can be manipulated any way you like. Maybe those 6000 kids disproved their theory.
At the end of the day, I have no side in the fight, but it's amazing how hypocritical people can get.
|