Hill and Doll showed us that correlation should not be dismissed too easily. But they also showed that we shouldn’t give up on the search for causal explanations. The pair painstakingly continued their research, and evidence of a causal association soon mounted.

希尔和多尔的例子告诉我们，不要轻易否定相关性，但他们也以行动证明，不应放弃寻找因果解释。俩人继续勤恳研究，很快就发现了更多表明因果关系的证据。

Hill and Doll took a pragmatic approach in the search for causation. For example, is there a dose-response relationship? Yes: heavy smokers are more likely to suffer from lung cancer. Does the timing make sense? Again, yes: smokers develop cancer long after they begin to smoke. This contradicts Fisher’s alternative hypothesis that people self-medicate with cigarettes in the early stages of lung cancer. Do multiple sources of evidence add up to a coherent picture? Yes: when doctors heard about what Hill and Doll were finding, many of them quit smoking, and it became possible to see that the quitters were at lower risk of lung cancer. We should respect correlation but it is a clue to a deeper truth, not the end of our investigations.

希尔和多尔在寻找因果关系时采取了一种务实的方法。比如，是否存在一种剂量效应？是的，烟瘾大的人更可能患肺癌。烟龄长短有关系吗？有关系，吸烟者开始吸烟很久后，癌细胞开始形成。这与费舍尔设想的人们在肺癌早期阶段用烟草进行自我医疗的假设相矛盾。多个证据来源凑到一起能否得到一个逻辑连贯的描述？答案是：能够得到。当医生们听闻希尔和多尔的发现时，许多医生开始戒烟，现实情况也表明戒烟者患肺癌的风险要更低。我们应该尊重相关性，但相关性只是通向更深层真理的一个线索，而不是研究的终点。

【吸烟与肺癌的关系真的有那么大吗】相关文章：

★ 比伯也在治疗抑郁症？ 明星的状态你真的想不到

★ 为什么有些人那么招蚊子？

★ 大热天不知道该选什么口味的冰淇淋？不如参考下你的星座吧

★ 10个字总结生活有多丧

★ 和同事和睦相处有助长寿

★ 吃霸王餐吗？用谢谢付账的那种

★ 一种新的减肥饮食法火遍国外,名字挺奇怪

★ 幸福人生教给我们的10个启迪

★ 大麻二酚产品真的会让你放松吗?

★ 为什么新割的草那么好闻？