[Stoves] report with disappointing results from cleaner cookstoves

[Xavier Brandao]

Tom,
Closing the list? I'd be curious to know who had this brilliant idea.
That'd be terrible, this is the space where we can find truly helpful 
information. This list has helped a lot of people. Much more than any 
webinar or conference/workshop ever did. Freedom of speech has its 
flaws, but among rants and negative emotions, there are some ideas too.
I still think we can use freedom of speech discuss on this list with 
patience, without too much anger or scorn.

Nikhil,
I can understand your frustration, but we don't know about the motives 
of the people behind this study, the way they think, the way they work. 
Rather than "qualify" them, I would really focus on their work, and on 
the scientific debate: did they screw up? Did they do a bad job? Where 
and why?

You are sure about the fact that a methodology where 3 groups in each 
village using *only *and for a given length of time traditional stove, 
or improved woodstove, or electric plates, wouldn't at all allow to 
*prove or have a fairly good assumption* that cleaner cooking does 
exist, and has a positive impact on health (may it be pneumonia or other 
diseases)?
If not, why?

Gentlemen and women,
I think for the sake of clarity, we should really put this simply. And 
we should start interacting with the study authors.
People on this list question the study methodology:

  * Assumption 1: there is a lot more to health than pneumonia.
      o Question 1 for the study authors: what do they think? Can
        cookstoves be cleaner, their use healthier than traditional
        stoves? They said some users noticed they were coughing less?
        How important is that, in terms of health?
  * Assumption 2: there is a lot more to pneumonia than just the smoky
    cooking device, there is malnutrition for example.
      o Action 1: what are the scientific papers which back up this
        assumption?
      o Question 2 for the study authors: didn't they know there was a
        lot more to pneumonia than just the cooking device? If so, then
        why such a methodology? Don't they think their results prove
        nothing?"

Has one of us started to talk with them? If not, should one of us do so?
We need to start this conversation, if we want to be going somewhere. We 
need to ask clarifications, present arguments, they will 
counter-argument, etc. etc. This is how a sound scientific debate
And this is how, collectively, we can agree on the right methodology for 
the next million-dollar health study to measure impact that we can be 
sure will happen in the future.
Instead, alas, of funding R&D to make cleaner stoves.

Best,

Xavier
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20161212/0dd23caa/attachment.html>