Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Lead poisoning from eating game shot with lead core bullets?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FEENIX" data-source="post: 1928927" data-attributes="member: 14204"><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)">Sorry, but you do not understand my position. It is obvious that you and I have differences in opinions, beliefs, and values. Having a peer-reviewed, accredited, and published empirical work has nothing to do with it as it does not make me any better to criticize another researcher's work. "IF" I have a problem with it, I would pick up where the researcher left off and fill the research gap and add to the knowledge base and for others to add or build upon for further or future research.</span></em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)">Sorry but my Academic Advisor (simply schedules my classes and provide advice as required about the program) has nothing to do with my research study and no that is not how the process work.</span></em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)">Sorry but that is not how the process works either. Once it is published, the researcher is not asking for meaningful feedback, as it is no longer needed. That is what a research gap does. There should be a recommendation for future studies that the next researcher has the opportunity to build upon and add to the knowledge base. Below is extracted from page138 of 156 of <a href="https://britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/76818-OLS-Report-final.pdf#page=29" target="_blank">https://britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/76818-OLS-Report-final.pdf#page=29</a> posted in #2.</span></em></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)"></span></em></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)">[ATTACH=full]200203[/ATTACH]</span></em></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)"></span></em></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)">There are studies that have more specific recommendations than the above.</span></em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><em><span style="color: rgb(44, 130, 201)">[USER=108159]@GunHawk[/USER] and [USER=110467]@DNADave[/USER] eloquently covered the human aspect, peer-review and IRB, and the overall nature of a research study. As previously noted, my research study will go through multiple levels of review processes between the IRB and AQRs. </span></em></p><p></p><p>The bottom-line, again as previously noted, it is up to individuals to synthesize the information being presented and they have the ultimate responsibility for their decision(s) and the consequences associated with it. If they choose to use lead or copper bullet, not discard meat around the wound channel, etc., that is their right. As [USER=75815]@Tulsa Reiner[/USER], noted ...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Cheers!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FEENIX, post: 1928927, member: 14204"] [I][COLOR=rgb(44, 130, 201)]Sorry, but you do not understand my position. It is obvious that you and I have differences in opinions, beliefs, and values. Having a peer-reviewed, accredited, and published empirical work has nothing to do with it as it does not make me any better to criticize another researcher’s work. “IF” I have a problem with it, I would pick up where the researcher left off and fill the research gap and add to the knowledge base and for others to add or build upon for further or future research.[/COLOR][/I] [I][COLOR=rgb(44, 130, 201)]Sorry but my Academic Advisor (simply schedules my classes and provide advice as required about the program) has nothing to do with my research study and no that is not how the process work.[/COLOR][/I] [I][COLOR=rgb(44, 130, 201)]Sorry but that is not how the process works either. Once it is published, the researcher is not asking for meaningful feedback, as it is no longer needed. That is what a research gap does. There should be a recommendation for future studies that the next researcher has the opportunity to build upon and add to the knowledge base. Below is extracted from page138 of 156 of [URL]https://britishbirds.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/76818-OLS-Report-final.pdf#page=29[/URL] posted in #2. [ATTACH type="full" alt="More research.JPG"]200203[/ATTACH] There are studies that have more specific recommendations than the above.[/COLOR][/I] [I][COLOR=rgb(44, 130, 201)][USER=108159]@GunHawk[/USER] and [USER=110467]@DNADave[/USER] eloquently covered the human aspect, peer-review and IRB, and the overall nature of a research study. As previously noted, my research study will go through multiple levels of review processes between the IRB and AQRs. [/COLOR][/I] The bottom-line, again as previously noted, it is up to individuals to synthesize the information being presented and they have the ultimate responsibility for their decision(s) and the consequences associated with it. If they choose to use lead or copper bullet, not discard meat around the wound channel, etc., that is their right. As [USER=75815]@Tulsa Reiner[/USER], noted ... Cheers! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Long Range Hunting & Shooting
Lead poisoning from eating game shot with lead core bullets?
Top