Subscribe to Cigar Aficionado and receive the digital edition of our Premier issue FREE!

Email this page Print this page
Share this page

Out of the Humidor

CA Readers
From the Print Edition:
George Burns, Winter 94/95

(continued from page 12)

I am delighted that the Autumn issue of Cigar Aficionado includes my opinion-page article. However, I am concerned with a couple of the editorial changes.

The first occurs in the last sentence of paragraph five. It states, "However, this procedure revealed only a 1.19 to 1 percent increase in lung cancer...which is not considered significant. Although very small, this increase is statistically significant at the 5 percent level using a one-tailed test."

The second occurs within the parentheses of paragraph six. It reads, "Most scientific studies demand a minimum three to one ratio of risk to prove a causal relationship..." In fact, a two to one ratio is generally sufficient.

These are obviously technical issues. The general conclusion that the evidence reveals little reason for concern over secondhand smoke still stands. Nevertheless, I feel I should make these points clear.

Mark Edward Stover
St. Louis, Missouri


< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

Share |

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Log In If You're Already Registered At Cigar Aficionado Online

Forgot your password?

Not Registered Yet? Sign up–It's FREE.

FIND A RETAILER NEAR YOU

Search By:

JOIN THE CONVERSATION

    

Cigar Insider

Cigar Aficionado News Watch
A Free E-Mail Newsletter

Introducing a FREE newsletter from the editors of Cigar Aficionado!
Sign Up Today