I really hate bothering to comment, but in the interests of science and the public good and all that.

Mr. Mendelson, really, how many damn articles did you google to cherry pick that one? See, that is what I would call misleading journalism or a facsimile thereof. You'll notice that the lead paragraph has no citations included with its proclamation.

Fortunately, I know a little about gambling stats, and I have friends who are sociologists, and I have done some technical and science writing, so I know when something like this is a blue herring (a cherry picked non-representative study). My late wife was a demographer, so that also sensitizes me to statements that do not sound correct.


Mr. V, I take you to task also for making a case based on anecdotal observations, which a lawyer should never do.

The article Mr. Mendelson link-posted provides no real evidence, or even strong support, for what he was arguing. If this is the kind of cherry picking of info Mr. Mendelson does to make a case for his positions, he should basically be shot.

For every hundred papers demonstrating one thing in science, there will be one to 20 papers leaning the other way. That is the nature of research. Had Mr. Mendelson gone to the published academic macro-studies, which would be a legitimate first step, he would have seen that his male-dominant stance, especially in the United States, was unsupportable.

Don't take my word for it -- go look at the research on gender and gambling. You'll find, first of all, that the majority of gambling by people in the US ages 45-64 is done by females.

Mr. Mendelson, this was nonsense. Using that particular web page to buttress your undisciplined comment was sheer junk writing. And Mr. V, making stupid anecdotal arguments is beneath you.


Bob Dietz