Talk:ERF of methyl mercury on intelligence quotient

Toxicology of methylmercury

How to read discussions

Fact discussion: .
Opening statement: Is the toxicology of methylmercury known enough to get a reliable result?Needs editing Closing statement: The method is a general way of doing these transformations, we can rely on this (A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.)
Argumentation: ⇤--1: . Is this variable toxicologically sound? --Olli 15:59, 17 September 2007 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) ⇤--2: . The further research of this variable goes on --Olli 15:59, 17 September 2007 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack) ----1: . This toxicological approach is generally approved --Olli 13:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)

How to read discussions

Fact discussion: .
Opening statement: Author judgement about the chosen distribution Closing statement: Resolution not yet found. (A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.)
Argumentation: ----1: . Justifiable procedure in author judgement would be to use name(s) of the author(s) used --> here e.g. (Leino O., 2007). Scientific information should always be citable. Maybe even a short rationale about the chosen distribution would be needed. (While proposing this, I understand this may seen trivial to someone. However, to my understanding reference issues the method will anyway face sooner or later.) --Anna Karjalainen 16:51, 20 November 2007 (EET) (type: truth; paradigms: science: comment)