Last 20 Years of Gun Studies are Flawed

TheBluesMan

Moderator Emeritus
Source

April 6, 2001
Contact: Kathryn Serkes
202.333.3855
kaserkes@worldnet.att.net

Medical Sentinel: Gun Violence Studies Based on Flawed Methods, Political Agendas

Most gun violence studies of the past two decades are based on flawed methodology and unduly influenced by political agendas, leading to biased and incorrect conclusions.

Those are the findings of a new two-part paper published in the Spring issue of THE MEDICAL SENTINEL, The Official Journal of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, special edition titled "Doctors and Guns (Part II) -- A Failure of the Public Health Model."

Author Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D., editor-in-chief, makes a compelling case that many studies are prejudiced by the public health establishment's 1979 stated objective of the total eradication of handguns in the United States.

He debunks a number of incorrect, widely-accepted claims promoted by anti-gun interest groups based on tainted studies, instead proving:


1. Women in particular, are NOT in more danger if they carry or own guns;
2. The ease of access to or availability of guns is(sic) NOT cause crime;
3. Mass killings would NOT be avoided if guns were not available;
4. Gun violence is NOT the leading accidental cause of death in children.

Dr. Faria blames "...those in public health with the proclivity toward the promulgation of preordained research such as the gun and violence research conducted by many investigators with a gun control agenda and disseminated in the medical journals...Much of this information is tainted, result-oriented and based on what can only be characterized as poor science."

For example, studies on women and handguns claim that a woman is up to 100 times more likely to be killed by handgun than to fire one for protection. "But they ignore the most important use of firearms -- protection. In 98 percent of cases, all you have to do is brandish a firearm. But these studies don't take those incidents into account. All they do is count women who have been killed in criminal acts and compare it to the number of women who have used a gun in self-defense."

Dr. Faria has recently chastised a number of physician organizations, including the AMA and the American Academy of Pediatrics, that urge doctors to ask patients about gun ownership. "This is playing politics."

Dr. Faria concludes, "We have an obligation to reach our conclusions based on objective data and scientific information rather than on ideology, emotionalism, political expediency, or budgetary consideration.

"Public health should not be subverted and medical science should not be perverted."

This article is full of good quotes. Let's be sure to spread this one around!
 

Waitone

New member
Truly interesting article since anti-constitutionalists seem to place lots of faith in the efforts of doctors to bring sanity to the flap about guns. We've all sensed the reports by doctors are bogus so I'm not completely surprised when a responsible outfit says "bogus."
 

jimpeel

New member
Faria writes great stuff. I am on his mailing list. You may write Helen Faria at hfaria@mindspring.com to get on the e-mail list.

Miguel A. Faria, Jr., M.D.
Editor-in-Chief, Medical Sentinel of the AAPS
Author, Vandals at the Gates of Medicine (1995) and Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine (1997)
Websites: http://www.haciendapub.com and http://www.aapsonline.org
 

Jeff Thomas

New member
The real meat is apparently in the paper cited in the article, but we don't have it available, at least for free ... can't blame them ... intellectual property.

Regards from AZ
 
Top