1. Jeremy D'Herville Jeremy D'Herville New Zealand says:

    Typical ambient wood smoke bad: 98.5% suggestive - comparative epidemiology and cost benefit studies, where too many variables are ignored, predetermined conclusions are skewed towards and the sponsors desired conclusions are always expressed by their authors. 1.5% toxicology studies where the scientists give us accurate information and inconclusive results. This is state power and gas company, energy futures market, top down funded JUNK. Focus on the real industrial polluters and give up on carbon offsetting pish like all this is. You won't take away peoples self sufficient, carbon neutral, sustainable, cost effective energy choices!

    • Justin Case Justin Case United States says:

      <i>"Typical ambient wood smoke bad: 98.5% suggestive - comparative epidemiology" </i>(Jeremy D'Herville)
      Where do you get your information? Where is your source that proves that '98.5%' of woodsmoke studies are 'suggestive' (and what does that even mean?)

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.