If prevention is found more often then causation then it prevents. If causation is found more often the prevention then it's a causative agent. Experiments are complicated, methods aren't always good. That figure is a bit disingenuous don't you think? ;)
Actually, it very much is. It's polemic and exaggerates a lot.
On a more serious note however I would like to emphasize that this study was performed on 40 patients only. It might contain some valuable insights but IMO it also has to be treated with caution as 40 is a pretty small sample size.
P.S: I'm not trying to mess with you here. Your article is very well written and the study seems to have been performed with great care. However, it's just too early to draw any conclusions from it without further investigations.
If prevention is found more often then causation then it prevents. If causation is found more often the prevention then it's a causative agent. Experiments are complicated, methods aren't always good. That figure is a bit disingenuous don't you think? ;)
Actually, it very much is. It's polemic and exaggerates a lot.
On a more serious note however I would like to emphasize that this study was performed on 40 patients only. It might contain some valuable insights but IMO it also has to be treated with caution as 40 is a pretty small sample size.
P.S: I'm not trying to mess with you here. Your article is very well written and the study seems to have been performed with great care. However, it's just too early to draw any conclusions from it without further investigations.