Side N
The Sun Does Not Kill Them
Which sources back which section of this article, and what its evidence base looks like.
Which sources back which section
| Section | Sources behind it | Count |
|---|---|---|
| What happened | The President Online interview; the laundry-temperature study; the humidity study; the airborne-allergen study; the Cochrane review; the 2017 children’s trial. | 6 |
| Timeline | Every source except the water-balance review — the timeline is the whole evidence base in the order it arrived. | 15 |
| The argument | The laundry-temperature and humidity studies; the two washing studies; the Cochrane review, the 2017 trial, the 2019 commentary, and the Japanese covers trial that splits the measures. | 7 |
| What others add | The water-balance review and the fluctuating-humidity study for the resistant stage; the two airborne-allergen studies; the Boston seasonal survey; the wild-versus-laboratory egg study; both Japanese avoidance trials; the interview for the untested remainder. | 9 |
| Conclusion | The interview, the humidity study, the Cochrane review and the 2017 trial. It introduces no source of its own and states no figure that is not above it. | 4 |
What the evidence base looks like
- 16Sources used on the page
- 13Of them reports of primary research; two are syntheses and one is an interview
- 2Read in full; the other fourteen at their abstracts, and nothing is attributed beyond one
- 3Claims in circulation for which no source was found, and which therefore appear nowhere on the page
| Function | How many | How they were read |
|---|---|---|
| Origin | 13 | All at their abstracts — peer-reviewed reports of experiments and trials, five of them from one laboratory whose humidity series underpins the argument, three of them Japanese futon measurements from the 1990s. |
| Synthesis | 2 | One in full — the Cochrane review, read at PubMed Central after the publisher’s own page refused. One at its abstract: a commentary by three authors of the trial it defends, which the page says where it uses it. |
| Reporting | 1 | In full — a magazine interview with a named researcher. Used for what he says and for the claims that originate with him, never for a figure that a paper also carries. |
Reliable
Reliable, but with an interestWorth believing and reliableWeak on both, and used with careHonest, but thin
Worth believing