No idea if it was peer reviewed or not, but there is some
sense to their approach. There is no simple, single metric
of harm (or benefit) from psychoactive substances, and any
weighting scheme is ultimately arbitrary, but apart from
using some sort of community based process to get weights,
rather than expert opinion, there's little else they could do.
Anthony Staines
On 11/04/10 12:18, Tony Greenfield wrote:
> to those allstatters who have read David Nutt's paper in the current Lancet:
>
>
>
> I cannot believe that this was peer reviewed.
>
>
>
> what to do you think?
>
>
>
> Tony Greenfield
>
> You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
>
> SIGNOFF allstat
>
> to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
--
Anthony Staines, Professor of Health Systems Research,
School of Nursing, Dublin City University, Dublin 9,Ireland.
Tel:- +353 1 700 7807. Mobile:- +353 86 606 9713
You may leave the list at any time by sending the command
SIGNOFF allstat
to [log in to unmask], leaving the subject line blank.
|