From: Bill Lucy 

In article , gaw{at}sover.net says...
> > As far as I can see from the URL I quoted, it's been sneered at by those
> > I
> > would expectto sneer at it, but not even a substantive attack has been
> > mounted on it.  Note how keen Bliar has been to accept other studies
> > using
> > the same methodology.  And the Lancet has not retracted, as it always
> > does
> > when a story is proven false.
> >
> >
>
> A google for LANCET CASUALTIES FLAWED produces 26,600 hits.  Which
> publications would you be inclined to trust?

"Bush Worst President" gets 33,300,000 hits on Google.

So, *my* search is obviously more valid than yours.



--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5