Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cor_Malek" data-source="post: 5344783" data-attributes="member: 91608">It appears that I gave impression that I'd make a better research than the article authors. It does not surprise me, because even if I didn't mean to imply this - I find that all too often people identify renunciation - with claim to higher knowledge. Let me address this with a quote:When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man,  for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he  fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I  do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling  particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I  know what I do not know. In my chutzpah, I actually tackled this idea, and not surprisingly - I wouldn't know where to start to get good, reliable conclusions. This is part of the problem I tried to highlight - people often don't realize just how much knowledge and experience it takes to develop a reliable measuring tool, and to execute it. How many doctors and professors feel inadequate in face of such task. To develop clear and unmistakable questions, attach proper values to them, gather data, notice and discard the unreliable parts, notice false correlations etc.Someone without enough experience, and most importantly who believes he's up to task - is by default not equipped. And I mean young doctors. I fart in general direction of layman reporters who do not realize extent of their own ignorance.And for the record? I wouldn't even bother asking the manufacturer. Production volume is typically among the most guarded trade secrets, though for different reasons in each industry (some want to create illusion of luxury, others popularity). It's a bit different with publishing industry, where pretty much everyone wants to inflate this number. Without the same auditory body that watches over volume of all publishers, the only thing I'd be comparing was boldness of marketing rep I got forwarded to. There's even chance that I'd be told truth. But I'd have no way of proving that, and telling truth would not even be in best self interest of asked parties, so data I'd get would be unusable.Besides, was there any reliable research in that field already? If not, the best I could do was to gather the info you've mentioned for sake of future comparison. Right now it'd be unusable. Science doesn't happen overnight <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Though anyone competent (ie renowned Consumer Reports) wouldn't ever use it as anything more than footnote trivia.</blockquote>

Verification