They did back around 2008. I used Wiki on a stick - see https://stickwiki.sourceforge.net/which was kind of neat) but after a few years, Chrome etc stopped letting it save itself.
He and his team started with 3,248 relevant studies of which 3,125 were immediately discarded. This left 123 cohort studies to which they added 87 relatively recent cohort studies. They then discarded 103 of these because they didn’t meet Stockwell’s increasingly stringent and somewhat arbitrary criteria. This left 107 studies, but there was still work to do.
...
In his comments to the Guardian he more or less admits that he is only doing this because the benefits of alcohol consumption are inconvenient to people like him who want to regulate booze like tobacco...
This NS piece is complete misinformation. This below is by a writer who has been writing about this sort of thing for years.
"Tim Stockwell has been up to his old tricks. In a study that was widely publicised this week despite being published in January, he claims - yet again - that moderate drinking does not confer health benefits. The study is largely a rehash of his meta-analysis from last year (which I wrote about here) so there isn’t much more to say except to note the extraordinary amount of cherry-picking that is required to come to such a conclusion.
He and his team started with 3,248 relevant studies of which 3,125 were immediately discarded. This left 123 cohort studies to which they added 87 relatively recent cohort studies. They then discarded 103 of these because they didn’t meet Stockwell’s increasingly stringent and somewhat arbitrary criteria. This left 107 studies, but there was still work to do.
In the new study, he introduces yet another filter for “quality” and reduces the number of studies down from 21 to 18 and then 15, but these still show lower risk for moderate drinkers, so he introduces some more criteria until a vast literature built up over 50 years is whittled down to just six studies. This gets rid of the apparent benefits of moderate drinking. He then removes one more study and, voila!, moderate drinkers are now at greater risk than teetotallers."
Here in the UK, almost 17% (about nine million people) live outside towns and villages. A trip to the local shop can be several miles on roads that don't have pavements and public transport is of the "one bus a day" type if you are lucky. There are a few people who cycle but they're dedicated and for most it is not an option. Cars are an essential.
Wouldn't there be a better outcome for those misidentified and publicly slandered and inconvenienced if they sued for stress? Some unlucky sod could have a heart attack from this.
Why do people keep repeating this lie; there is no Brexit disaster. Life goes on as normal in post Brexit Britain; lockdowns did way more harm than Brexit and we've mostly recovered from those. The rest of the EU seems to be suffering more economically than Britain. We're selling more into the EU than when we were in the EU, have many trade agreements with US states and other countries, were ahead of the EU with Covid vaccines and first to support the Ukraine.
I wrote the postal game Quest back in 1989-1990, a 1,000 player postal game. 40,000 lines of Turbo Pascal. Others came after and fixed some of the bugs and it's now run over the internet. https://kjcgames.com/quest/quest.htm
There are no hard and fast definitions of programming or coding. To me they are the same but coding is more like slang. The formal name for both is software development.
From the BMJ *British Medical Journal). "Analyses of the dose of alcohol consumed showed that 2.5–14.9 g alcohol (about ≤1 drink) per day was protective for all five outcomes compared with no alcohol (table 2⇑). For coronary heart disease outcomes, all levels of intake >2.5 g/day had similar degrees of risk reduction. " https://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d671
I learnt original Pascal at University in 1979 (Queen's University Belfast). It was very spartan compared to what Turbo Pascal would later add. Strings were a type alfa and were ten characters long.
Other rankings of programming languages are:
1. RedMonk. Puts C++ at 7th.
2. StackOverflow Developer Survey (2022) puts it at 9th.
3. GitHub Octoverse puts C++ at 6th.
4. Reddit's programming language subreddits has it at 4th. (Rust is close behind)
So equally weighted those would put C++ at 6.5 (average), certainly nowhere near the 3rd that Tiobe puts it. I consider their results to be outliers and it's about time people started ignoring them. I think their methodology is flawed. They have C at #2 while most others put it somewhere around #10.