In article ,
Henry Kuska wrote:

H. Kuska reply: Billo, please go back to table 6, that is where the referent
herbicide group (that you refer to) was utilized (8 out of 118). The
authors do not have to state what referent group they are using for each
Odds Ratio calculated, it is defined by definition. If you are unwilling to
accept this by trusting the authors, do the calculation yourself for the
similar phosphine case (see below).

I know that you specialize in psychic understanding of articles
without reading them, but let's see, just for chuckles what
the authors said.

In this case, the authors *did* state the referent group, and not just
in the table to which you refer. If you read the text of the paper,
the paragraph where they discuss the glyphosate OR *starts* by
noting the referent group is the herbicide group.

Here, Henry, let's see what the text says:


"Examination of the frequency of applicator families with birth defects
by pesticide use class category (Table 6) shows that 15.4% of
applicators who applied fumigants, insecticides, and herbicides had at
least one child with a birth defect compared with 6.8% in the referent
exposure group who applied only herbicides... Altogether, 3.8% of
children whose parent used phosphine versus 1.5% of those who did not
use the fumigant had adverse central nervous system or neurobehavioral
sequelae (OR = 2.5; CI, 1.22?5.05). Similarly, use of the phosphonamino
herbicides (glyphosate, Roundup) was overrepresented in the adverse
birth and developmental effect group. Forty-three percent of the
children (6 of 14) who had parent-reported ADD/ADHD used phosphonamino
herbicides (OR = 3.6; CI, 1.35-9.65). No other commonly used pesticide
compared by major organ and/or functional system was uniquely
associated with specific adverse birth or developmental effects. Use of
different classes of pesticides over the 4?6 months of agricultural
pesticide use compared with the use of herbicides and no other
pesticide class (herbicide use period, -15 April to 1 July) suggests
that interaction among pesticide classes used may be a factor in the
birth defects observed (Table 6)."


So, Henry, the paragraph begins by noting the the referent group
was the herbicide-only group, the paragraph ends by noting that
the referent group was the herbicide group, the OR is
in the middle, and the conclusion is the one I note -- that
the interaction between pesticides is the probable cause.

But, Henry, if you want to claim the authors are lying, and
that they are using a different referent group while claiming
they are using the herbicide group, go ahead. If you want
to claim the authors are lying when they say that it's the
interaction of pesticides and not Roundup alone, then
run with it.

But the bottom line is that the authors wrote what the
authors wrote, and the authors used the referent group
they claimed, and the conclusion is the one they concluded.

And if you bothered to read the damned articles, you would
know that.


billo