by Grahame » Tue Dec 05, 2006 2:16 pm
I'd look for a rebuttal of that article on the Guardian's weekly Bad Science column soon.
The gist of the argument will be around the sample size - 48 subjects isn't a huge sample to draw such a conclusion from. Also, what was used as a control group?
At least it makes a change from the "Cycling makes men impotent" annual headline.