Quote:
Originally Posted by ottopottomouse
It's because fat cunts eat 6 bigmacs and 9 large fries all balanced out with 2 pints of diet coke and think they are healthy.
|
qft
the problem with these kind of studies are that there isn't enough of a user base with similar dietary situations to be able to base a valid conclusion on.
Especially these stroke/cancer studies which are long-term based...
eg, take 500 subjects, follow them for 20 years. At the end of 20 years, you've lost contact with say 100. So 400 subjects, 50 die of strokes. Out of those, 25 drunk diet coke, 5 drunk regular, and 20 drunk water. Therefore, you have a 25/400 or 25/50 risk of dyeing from a stroke (depending on how you spin the numbers). If you take the more reasonable value of 25/400 and say out of those 25, how many smoked and you find 35 and say out of the 400 how many smoked, you found 200, then you're risk is 10/400 or 10/50? Then out of those non-smokers (global), you say how many eat carrots and 200/400 ate carrots, but out of those that die (50), 40 ate carrots, is the risk more significant if you eat carrots, smoked and drunk diet coke, than someone who didn't eat carrots, smoked but drunk water?
Answer after a few tokes.
Just because it's published science, doesn't make it credible.....