The innumeracy and linguistic imprecision in medical papers is irritating.
In “The future of epigenetic therapy in solid tumours—lessons from the past,” we have the sentence:
One exciting development is the recognition that virtually all tumours harbour mutations in genes that encode proteins that control the epigenome.9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20
11 citations! Wow!
What is the motte version of this sentence? Does it mean:
Nearly tumor in every patient has a mutation in an epigenetic control gene?
That in nearly every type of tumor, at least a fraction of them contain a mutation in an epigenetic control gene?
That epigenetic control gene mutations exist in at least a substantial minority of several tumor types?
The third, weakest claim is the one that the 11 citations can support: in a minority of blood cancer patients, a mutation in an epigenetic control gene may set up downstream epigenetic dysregulation that causes the cancer phenotype. I would find this version of their claim much more helpful than the original, vague, misleading version.
The innumeracy and linguistic imprecision in medical papers is irritating.
In “The future of epigenetic therapy in solid tumours—lessons from the past,” we have the sentence:
11 citations! Wow!
What is the motte version of this sentence? Does it mean:
Nearly tumor in every patient has a mutation in an epigenetic control gene?
That in nearly every type of tumor, at least a fraction of them contain a mutation in an epigenetic control gene?
That epigenetic control gene mutations exist in at least a substantial minority of several tumor types?
The third, weakest claim is the one that the 11 citations can support: in a minority of blood cancer patients, a mutation in an epigenetic control gene may set up downstream epigenetic dysregulation that causes the cancer phenotype. I would find this version of their claim much more helpful than the original, vague, misleading version.