|
|
||||||||
USING SCIENCE TO MEET PUBLIC HEALTH GOALS |
The author is with the Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Mass.
Correspondence: Requests for reprints should be sent to David Ozonoff, MD, MPH, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany Street, Boston, MA 02118 (e-mail: dozonoff{at}bu.edu).
Core epistemological questionsquestions about what we know, how we know it, and when we are justified in saying we know ithave a long and deep history. The US Supreme Court broached the subject in the 1993 decision Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc, with references to Hempel, Popper, and other scholars.
We comment here on the articles of Rothman and Greenland, who are scientists, and Haack, who is a philosopher. Their views suggest that questions of causation are neither as simple nor as difficult as many scientists and philosophers have made them.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. Bingham, L. Boden, R. Clapp, P. Hoppin, S. Krimsky, D. Michaels, D. Ozonoff, and A. Robbins BINGHAM ET AL. RESPOND Am J Public Health, February 1, 2006; 96(2): 206 - 207. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Michaels Scientific Evidence and Public Policy Am J Public Health, July 1, 2005; 95(S1): S5 - S7. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |