From the 'Daily Mail' for less specialised readers:
With 1 one scientifically accredited source, as being from the scientific journal 'Nature' ~ for more specialised readers:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrg.2017.4
With 177 scientifically accredited reference sources.
[Updated with the second source at approximately 18:07 ~ on Friday the 30th March, 2018.]
The Daily Mail had a headline once "How a romantic candle-lit meal can give you cancer". Need I say more?
Great contrast in sources BTW! It's like comparing rats piss to Premiere Voyage!
The Daily Mail had a headline once "How a romantic candle-lit meal can give you cancer". Need I say more?
Great contrast in sources BTW! It's like comparing rats piss to Premiere Voyage!
Great contrast in sources BTW! It's like comparing rats piss to Premiere Voyage!
The reason for choosing the Daily Mail was that: the 'information' itself was correct, it correlated with the publishing in the scientific journal Nature, it was amenable to readers of lower or higher reading capacities, and it was there at the time.
Basically, it matters little to me who reports any information ~ as long as that information is accurately reported.
