Fox, Greiffenstein, and Lees-Haley (2005) and McCaffrey and Yantz (2005) criticized our 2004 article that reported neuropsychological evidence of cognitive impairment in a sample of individuals exposed to toxic molds who complained of cognitive difficulties (Gordon et al., 2004). They critiqued the study's justification, design, analyses, and conclusions and characterized it as poor epidemiology. This article is a rebuttal to their comments. It documents that both sets of negative comments are based on frequent inaccuracies, mischaracterizations of our findings, and red herrings. Furthermore, they failed to refute the implications of the study's main findings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324826an1304_6DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cognitive impairment
8
impairment associated
4
associated toxigenic
4
toxigenic fungal
4
fungal exposure
4
exposure response
4
response critiques
4
critiques fox
4
fox greiffenstein
4
greiffenstein lees-haley
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!