Talk:ERF of methyl mercury on intelligence quotient: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(moved from Beneris -- ~~~~) |
Juha Villman (talk | contribs) m (typo correction) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
{{discussion | {{discussion | ||
|Dispute= Is the toxicology of methylmercury | |Dispute= Is the toxicology of methylmercury known enough to get a reliable result? | ||
|Outcome= More research is needed | |Outcome= More research is needed | ||
|Argumentation = | |Argumentation = | ||
Revision as of 11:37, 4 November 2009
moved from Beneris -- Jouni 11:28, 14 February 2008 (EET)
Toxicology of methylmercury
| Fact discussion: . |
|---|
| Opening statement:
Closing statement: Resolution not yet found. (A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation: |
| Fact discussion: . |
|---|
| Opening statement:
Closing statement: Resolution not yet found. (A closing statement, when resolved, should be updated to the main page.) |
| Argumentation:
----#(number):: . 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)
|