On March 17th, USA Today did an piece on the China drywall controversy.
In a nutshell, it goes on to describe how houses in Florida built with this stuff have been emitting a sulfur-like odor. One person describes how his TV and air-conditioner have failed from it and then he went on to develop sleep apnea and sinus problems from it. Maybe. It turns out this info came from a huge class action lawsuit from tens of thousands of homeowners. This is not to belittle their complaints because I sure don't want the smell of rotten eggs coming from my walls. It once again also puts a little more distrust in the products we get from China. Medical evidence from lawsuits, however, isn't exactly a double-blinded study.
I think my biggest issue is with our complacency on the simple things. This really doesn't have to do with this individual case but with the headline. On the second page of the USA Today Money section (in the actual paper) where the story is continued, the headline goes:
Health tests come back OK so far, but lawyers are skeptical
Doesn't that strike anyone else as odd? Who cares what the lawyers think? Shouldn't it say, "Health tests come back OK so far, but doctors are skeptical"? For one, lawyers don't know medicine. Secondly, of course these lawyers are skeptical because they are suing and are biased. It is a stupid headline that no one questions....except me, I guess. It is as if a headline came out stating:
Supreme Court decision overturns first amendment, but doctors are skeptical of legality
I think my biggest issue is with our complacency on the simple things. This really doesn't have to do with this individual case but with the headline. On the second page of the USA Today Money section (in the actual paper) where the story is continued, the headline goes: