 |
|
| Vol.3.110 | |
Correlation Does Not Imply Causationby Vince PoscenteAuthor of The Ant and the Elephant, Invinceable Principles and The Age of Speed The dictum "correlation does not imply causation" refers to our natural tendency to pattern match - take a proximate information and automatically come to a conclusion. There's doggy do do on your lawn. Your neighbor has a dog. Conclusion, your neighbor is a deadbeat dog owner. The economy is bad. The government is in power. Conclusion the government doggy do do'd on your life. FEMA botched the Katrina response. TSA is an annoying inconvenience at the airport. Conclusion? After universal healthcare we're all going to turn into raving, out of control communists like those Swedes and Canadians. There's even fill in the blank, mix and match correlation - causation. On the news you saw (someone or something) (die, blow up, disappear, crash, burn, lie, skip town). An (ethnicity, gender, political party, boss, car company, age group, country) was profiled in a news piece. Conclusion: "Ah ha, PROOF! All those people/things are (bad, wrong, crazy, to blame)."
Recently I reversed my concerns when I dug deeper and found overwhelming scientific data supporting vaccination.* (See An Epidemic of Fear, Wired Magazine, Nov. 2009) Then the correlating-causation crowd jumps in (without doing sufficient research - like reading the entire link I just gave in the previous sentence) and says, "But the pharmaceutical companies make money. Scientists work at pharmaceutical companies. Conclusion, the scientists only tell us skewed information because they're paid off by greedy pharmaceutical executives." Folks, don't be unwittingly snared in the correlation implying causation trap. Make your decisions based on ample discovery from scientists and experts. Not well meaning talk show hosts, bloggers and politicians put on the spot on live TV. Should you get the H1N1 vaccine? Based on stacks of research, the scientific community (who by their nature cannot speak in absolutes because of anomalies or countless permutations) is lock step in its message, "Highly recommended." Some talk show hosts (who get paid to speak in absolutes) say, "Definitely don't do it" based on suspicion or proximate slices of information. Isolate the two recommendations. "Highly recommended" or "Definitely don't do it." Which statement carries more gravitas? Jumping to conclusions can be dangerous and can carry a risk that may negatively impact you and others too. Be quicker to discover and slower to decide. Until next week, it's full speed ahead,
* Research from published findings in Pediatrics, The Journal of Infectious Diseases, The New England Journal of Medicine, Nature, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, The Institute of Medicine, American Academy of Pediatrics and Public Health Service, Paul Offit's book, Autism's False Prophets, and Michael Specter's Denialism: How Irrational Thinking Hinders Scientific Progress, Harms the Planet and Threatens Our Lives, insights from Sharon Kaufman UC San Francisco and An Epidemic of Fear, by Amy Wallace, Wired Magazine, Nov. 2009. PS To watch correlation and causation unfold before your very eyes see examples of this in the Wired blog comments. It's fascinating to see the leaps in logic or emotional outbursts in the comments. Most stemming right back to correlation-causation.
|
Email This Full Speed Ahead Article to a Friend 
|
© 2010 Vince Poscente. All Rights Reserved. |
Did you see a recent HBO documentary regarding Autism? Well meaning parents of autistic children noticed symptoms between 18 and 24 months, correlating with the child's vaccination. A child gets vaccinated. Autism surfaces in a child. Conclusion, the child is autistic because of the vaccine. After watching the documentary I was immediately questioning my trusting nature in our medical system. It was troubling to know my children were vaccinated and, based on my newfound knowledge from HBO - vaccines must be the cause of autism.