7 Comments

Brilliant, thank you

Expand full comment

Whew! Thank you!

Expand full comment

Not sure if sarcastic, but if so then yes! This took much longer than I thought it would to write and post! I actually had a few things I wanted to research and post by the end of this week but it seems like that will have to wait for some time.

Anyways, appreciate all the people who held out this long!

Expand full comment

No sarcasm intended. The series was a lot to take in, but quite informative, and I always appreciate discussions about the limitations of referenced studies.

Expand full comment

Thanks for your comment! I was curious because I never really know how people take these posts (if too long, too heavy on the jargon, etc.). I try to include some general concerns about studies but I'm likely to miss a lot as well.

I'd like to gauge subscribers soon and get a feel for what they think of the newsletters so I'm always open to criticisms!

Expand full comment

You are welcome. I pass on to others a portion of what I read here, from you and others -- parts for which they possess the background to understand -- and I do what I can to estimate a form of "margin of error" in the information and to select for what is well attested by multiple witnesses. The details you provide are quite valuable for this purpose, although I sometimes feel like my head is going to explode. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the comment! It's something I try to keep in mind about the "denseness" of the content. I'm usually learning as I make these posts, and I'll certainly say there are some times where I may spend a few hours looking at a paper and getting a headache because I can't figure out their methodology or results! I do my best and it's also why I try to make comments when possible for people to have some level of skepticism on my reporting or to check the papers for themselves as well!

Expand full comment