Time magazine recently wrote about a research study that linked abortions to future occurrences of premature births and low birth weight babies, by 2 and 3, respectively. I understand that Time was trying to explain to the general population that
the study is hardly perfect; the data is more than 40 years old and doesn’t distinguish between medical abortions and ’spontaneous abortions,’ better known as miscarriages.
Even with this statement in the first paragraph of their article, the shocking headline doesn’t quite convey the same message.
They claim that the large sample size helps to increase significance, but when they sample used for the study is over 50 years old and doesn’t distinguish between medical abortions and miscarriages, I would think that sample size doesn’t matter when something this big was ignored by the researchers. While the journal it was published in is not that credible, but the general American public doesn’t know these things.
Do your part to help spread the word about bogus studies that impact a woman’s right to choose!
Find out more at Choice USA.
Post a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.