Post hoc ergo propter hoc

2002.02.15: Life span and nightly sleep
2002.05.07: Test performance and cotinine
2002.05.07: Test performance and breast-feeding
2002.07.15: Alzheimer's disease and caffeine
2002.10.23: Heart attacks and exercise
2002.11.09: Pain and computer use
2002.11.11: Alzheimer's disease and wine
2002.11.11: Fertility and rural location
2003.01.07: Life span and obesity
2003.01.08: Heart attacks and alcohol
2003.03.10: Obesity and television
2003.03.17: Happiness and marriage
2003.04.02: Heart attacks and a smoking ban
2003.06.19: Dementia and games
2003.09.04: Bullies and criminals
2003.09.16: Health and marriage
2003.10.06: Weight gain and dieting
2003.11.17: Skin cancer and other cancers
2003.12.09: Colon cancer and vitamin D
2004.01.06: Diabetes and coffee
2004.01.13: Multiple sclerosis and vitamin D
2004.03.02: Blood pressure and breast-feeding
2004.04.08: Surgical prowess and video games
2005.01.11: Obesity and lack of sleep

The above news reports mislead many readers into interpreting correlation as cause; post hoc as propter hoc; speculation as facts. Sometimes the study authors misrepresent their own results (``the important message from this study is, let's work on prevention''); sometimes the reporters misrepresent the results (``mental stimulation wards off dementia'').

Correlative studies are, at best, raw data asking for explanation. They shouldn't be confused with scientific studies providing the explanation.