No Phones Arent Giving Kids Horns Seriously

The video debunks the myth that cell phone use causes kids to grow horns, a claim that spread due to misreporting of a flawed study. The study, which found bone spurs at the base of some skulls, was misrepresented by media as linking phone use to horn growth. The video highlights issues in peer review and science journalism, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing correlation from causation. It provides guidelines for evaluating scientific studies and media reports, urging critical thinking and skepticism towards sensationalized claims.

What does the phrase 'correlation does not equal causation' mean in the context of this study?

What steps should be taken to critically evaluate scientific studies before accepting their conclusions?

How did the Washington Post respond to the criticism of their article on the study?