On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 12:10:18 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
>Mark Thorson wrote:
>>
>> "Pete C." wrote:
>> >
>> > Then how do you explain the fact that the data you cited showed that
>> > some farmed samples had lower levels than some wild samples?
>>
>> It's true that the very highest levels of contamination
>> found in wild fish were slightly higher than the lowest
>> levels found in farmed fish. Complete non-overlap of
>> these distributions is not a requirement for sayiong
>> tthat there's a huge difference in the contamination
>> of farmed vs. wild.
>
>And I pointed out the missing data on the sample distribution that makes
>your conclusion nothing more than an assumption.

you could always donate your liver for an autopsy to make the data
more complete.

your pal,
blake
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **