Burch P R
Med Hypotheses. 1982 Sep;9(3):293-306. doi: 10.1016/0306-9877(82)90158-x.
During the late 1950s Sir Ronald Fisher questioned the already popular, but in his view precipitate, causal interpretation of the association between smoking and lung cancer. His pungently expressed views began a controversy that has smouldered and sometimes flared ever since. The most recent attack on Fisher's constitutional hypothesis was launched by Reif and in this paper I consider the validity of his criticisms. A range of evidence shows that it is not yet possible to distinguish between constitutional and causal-plus-constitutional interpretations although recent studies indicate that a pure causal hypothesis is incapable of explaining the full association as observed in Western populations. Unfortunately, errors of diagnosis and death certification still impede the rigorous testing of adequately formulated hypotheses.
20世纪50年代后期,罗纳德·费希尔爵士对吸烟与肺癌之间联系的因果解释提出了质疑,这种解释当时已广受欢迎,但在他看来过于仓促。他言辞犀利地表达了自己的观点,引发了一场争论,这场争论自此一直时隐时现,有时还会激烈爆发。赖夫对费希尔的体质假说发起了最新一轮抨击,在本文中我将探讨其批评的合理性。一系列证据表明,目前尚无法区分体质性解释和因果加体质性解释,尽管近期研究表明,单纯的因果假说无法解释西方人群中观察到的全部关联。不幸的是,诊断和死亡证明方面的错误仍然妨碍着对充分阐述的假说进行严格检验。