My own study revealed to me that the problem is “new” studies. After a few years, the ones that still have some staying power are worth paying attention to.
Sometimes I heard that what hurts years ago is good today. Once salami was poison for our blood value and now seems that it’s not that dangerous for cholesterol.
Therein lies the problem the layperson has with science. It’s a core strength of science that almost nothing is for certain and everything is subject to verification and falsification. Eventually, one can get much closer to the truth that way, but getting there drives most people nuts. People want certainty, and if that’s what you want religion will happily sell certainty to you and take your money at the same time…
Best to have everything in moderation I’d say. Just about everting from eggs to red meat has been labelled as good for you, bad for you, good, bad, good, a bad ad naseum. I think some wet behind the ears researcher comes up with a view about things and thinks it’ll make their name. And so it does, but in the way they had planned. When I had heart attack 20 years ago I was told to have a glass of red wine a day. Now I’m told not to. Not that I did in the first place. So moderation is the pathway.
The press, television, radio and the blogosphere latch on to every new study and report it as though the results were definitive, because the truth is not as important as eyeballs on ads.
USA Today: “Heavy coffee consumption linked to higher death risk.”
National Institutes of Health: “Study finds that coffee drinkers have lower risk of death.”
As it turns out, most of what the media reports is nothing like the actual conclusions found in the studies being reported.
I wish the media would get the message that science doesn’t work just because of one study. Science works when you have a preponderance of evidence based on peer-reviewed, repeatable results.
Sadly, the news cycle can’t wait 50 years for those clicks, so this is what we get.
If you want to know whether a study is reliable, find out who paid for it. I once read about a study that showed that eating almonds decreased your chance of heart disease. It was paid for by a California nut-growers’ association. Mars Inc. once paid for a study that showed that eating moderate amounts of chocolate strengthens your teeth. And then there are all the studies funded by tobacco companies that show that smoking is good for you.
If you eat a balanced diet of whole foods instead of processed, that are organic (or pastured, for dairy & meat; or wild, for seafood) and keep added sugars, empty calorie carbs (ie bread & pasta that aren’t whole grain) and vegetable oils to a minimum (fruit oils like olive and avocado are far better for you), and don’t listen to studies sponsored by food companies, then you’re doing it right.
Actually, a fried stick of butter means you’re going to die of terminal stupidity, as the only places you can get such disgusting “food” is at a state fair like the Texas and Iowa State Fairs – the various political reporters always mention them when reporting on the candidates appearances!
Cherry pick the results you want to see. Hunt around until you find an “expert” who agrees with point you’re trying to make. (This can take a while). Study is now complete and can be published with, hopefully, a Government grant.
I remember when milk was bad for you. A few years later, milk was good for you. I remember when eggs were bad for you. But it wasn’t long until eggs were good for you. I remember when sugar was good and bad for you, until it became both bad and good for you. I remember when nobody really knew what gluten was until somebody said gluten was bad for you. I remember being confused when “organic” foods were touted so highly, as I had never encountered and inorganic carrot.
The upshot is merely that I have pondered for years how in the world did the human race survive long enough to propagate itself without knowing if it’s food supply was good or bad for it?
Used to be every few years the ADA would change recommendations on how to brush teeth. I always did it the same and randomly I was correct. But now I use electric.
I read that smoking shortens one’s life – I quit smokingI read that eating red meat shortens one’s life – I stopped eating red meatI read that drinking shortens one’s life – I quit reading
What, did Pastis go back to the mid-‘90s for this one? I know these studies still take place now and took place before the mid-’90s, but I remember a point there in the mid-‘90s where every week there was a new study which said to ignore the previous week’s study as that suddenly wasn’t bad for you but the study of the current week was.
Pig should try Homer Simpson’s favorite food, bacon wrapped sticks of butter (Pig shouldn’t get upset about the bacon, remember, he thinks those BLTs taste so darn good).
I was told a diet of fatty foods like fried sticks of butter was necessary. Hasn’t anyone else always been told, “Have to. They’re small” or did I hear that wrong?
There is a problem with scientific reporting. It’s that the authors feel the need for a click-baity title. You actually have to read the article to get what’s going on. How many here were at least momentarily confused that black holes were actually holograms? That’s what the titles implied. Read the article and all that is being claimed is that the math model for holograms also seems to be accurate on how black holes function.
I ignore all studies about what to eat. I figure I’ll just follow the examples set by my forebears. After all, they all lived into their 90s, except the few smokers in the bunch, and I share their DNA. I cook using recipes that have been handed down for several generations. I must admit, however, that it is getting harder and harder to find some of the ingredients I need.
Studies are like cars: designed for rapid obsolescence. After all, “studiers” need constant employment producing new studies. So, Pig’s solution is appropriate: just ignore the studies. Chances are your chances will not change.
On a personal note, my mother once told me that as an infant I crawled up onto the kitchen table, grabbed a quarter-pound stick of butter, and started to chew on it….
The other reason is that news media have no skill or patience to actually read the “new study” and understand the methodology used to arrive at the conclusion. Also, it’s really important to look at what corporate interest group sponsored that new study, only paying for conclusions that support their industry.
BasilBruce over 3 years ago
A new study shows that 74 percent of studies are wrong.
BE THIS GUY over 3 years ago
Butter is one of the leading causes of happiness.
Concretionist over 3 years ago
My own study revealed to me that the problem is “new” studies. After a few years, the ones that still have some staying power are worth paying attention to.
Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus Premium Member over 3 years ago
Sometimes I heard that what hurts years ago is good today. Once salami was poison for our blood value and now seems that it’s not that dangerous for cholesterol.
baddawg1989 over 3 years ago
New study shows that P.T. Barnum was right – there’s a sucker born every minute.
Mr. Snuffles over 3 years ago
New study shows fried butter is better for you than reading most studies.
Alexander the Good Enough over 3 years ago
Therein lies the problem the layperson has with science. It’s a core strength of science that almost nothing is for certain and everything is subject to verification and falsification. Eventually, one can get much closer to the truth that way, but getting there drives most people nuts. People want certainty, and if that’s what you want religion will happily sell certainty to you and take your money at the same time…
B UTTONS over 3 years ago
Reading fake flip-flop news increase stress and shorten lifespan.
Aldew Yellowson over 3 years ago
A new study shows that 72.29% of statistics I give you are made up on the spot.
Major Matt Mason Premium Member over 3 years ago
“You have to stop taking it easy and start overdoing it. But don’t overdo it-take it easy.”
Kveldulf over 3 years ago
The only online comments you should trust are those submitted by Abraham Lincoln.
Ratkin Premium Member over 3 years ago
All generalizations are false.
sergioandrade Premium Member over 3 years ago
“Lies! DAMM LIES! And Statistics.” Mark Twain
Georgette Washington Bunny over 3 years ago
Fried stick of butter? Better give that back to Paula Deen.
Bilan over 3 years ago
Foods in particular are not good or bad. Their ingredients are good or bad. Most any food item is a combination of good and bad.
ronaldspence over 3 years ago
Many a truth is expressed in hyperbole!
danholt over 3 years ago
It says that he’s been to the Iowa State Fair…
Qiset over 3 years ago
Fried butter? Must have gone to the Texas State Fair!
dadoctah over 3 years ago
“That it’s delicious”.
gawkface over 3 years ago
as there is no study that has clearly ruled out fried butter is 100% bad for the cholestrol, pig you can simply believe ur heart and relish the taste
Tog over 3 years ago
Best to have everything in moderation I’d say. Just about everting from eggs to red meat has been labelled as good for you, bad for you, good, bad, good, a bad ad naseum. I think some wet behind the ears researcher comes up with a view about things and thinks it’ll make their name. And so it does, but in the way they had planned. When I had heart attack 20 years ago I was told to have a glass of red wine a day. Now I’m told not to. Not that I did in the first place. So moderation is the pathway.
Imagine over 3 years ago
Everything in moderation. Including statistics.
Say What Now‽ Premium Member over 3 years ago
A new study says that over time all new studies will become will become old studies.
The Old Wolf over 3 years ago
The press, television, radio and the blogosphere latch on to every new study and report it as though the results were definitive, because the truth is not as important as eyeballs on ads.
USA Today: “Heavy coffee consumption linked to higher death risk.”
National Institutes of Health: “Study finds that coffee drinkers have lower risk of death.”
As it turns out, most of what the media reports is nothing like the actual conclusions found in the studies being reported.
I wish the media would get the message that science doesn’t work just because of one study. Science works when you have a preponderance of evidence based on peer-reviewed, repeatable results.
Sadly, the news cycle can’t wait 50 years for those clicks, so this is what we get.
Purple People Eater over 3 years ago
If you want to know whether a study is reliable, find out who paid for it. I once read about a study that showed that eating almonds decreased your chance of heart disease. It was paid for by a California nut-growers’ association. Mars Inc. once paid for a study that showed that eating moderate amounts of chocolate strengthens your teeth. And then there are all the studies funded by tobacco companies that show that smoking is good for you.
Flynn White Premium Member over 3 years ago
Old study says people don’t trust new studies.
Reader over 3 years ago
Trust the science
1953Baby over 3 years ago
Is there REALLY such a thing as fried butter?!?
Zebrastripes over 3 years ago
Forget all the bull….moderation is the key!
Jeffin Premium Member over 3 years ago
Deep.
Goat from PBS over 3 years ago
This is why we all should be cautious about the internet… and avoid deep-fried butter.
david_42 over 3 years ago
A new study shows that 100% of people who breath die.
mail2jbl over 3 years ago
And this is why you cannot trust “the science” – especially “the science” espoused by Dr. Fauci.
Ellis97 over 3 years ago
Science can’t make up its mind.
retjeff over 3 years ago
a new study found that studies end up favoring whoever funded the study.
FassEddie over 3 years ago
Whaddaya wanna live forever for?
pheets over 3 years ago
Dare to think and decide for one’s self. While we are still able and allowed.
chris_o42 over 3 years ago
New study shows that New Studies will drive you crazy.
Tentoes over 3 years ago
And Pastis puts his finger on the truth!
Squoop over 3 years ago
If you eat a balanced diet of whole foods instead of processed, that are organic (or pastured, for dairy & meat; or wild, for seafood) and keep added sugars, empty calorie carbs (ie bread & pasta that aren’t whole grain) and vegetable oils to a minimum (fruit oils like olive and avocado are far better for you), and don’t listen to studies sponsored by food companies, then you’re doing it right.
Ken Otwell over 3 years ago
That fried stick of butter is ok if you fry it in olive oil.
alansmethers over 3 years ago
Did no one notice the sausage and bacon that were thrown out with the “red meat”? Pork, the other white meat?
Otis Rufus Driftwood over 3 years ago
We all need to take the time to understand these studies and not just blindly follow experts. But common sense says don’t eat fried butter.
SheMc over 3 years ago
It said go ahead, we will do a study for you!!!
IshkaBibel1 over 3 years ago
Hot dogs and sausages are destined to be declared “Health Food” once we realize how important connective tissues are to our diet.
tripwire45 over 3 years ago
Truth about government (taxpayer = our money) funded studies.
Cameron1988 Premium Member over 3 years ago
This is too true. Just like when they constantly say on the news that alcohol, or coffee will expand your life span, or vice versa
rugeirn over 3 years ago
New study shows that not eating red meat—delicious, savory, juicy, lusciously satisfying red meat—makes life unbearably long.
wellis1947 Premium Member over 3 years ago
Actually, a fried stick of butter means you’re going to die of terminal stupidity, as the only places you can get such disgusting “food” is at a state fair like the Texas and Iowa State Fairs – the various political reporters always mention them when reporting on the candidates appearances!
Spiny Norman Premium Member over 3 years ago
I’d rather have fried ice cream. Yeah, it’s a thing.
Packratjohn Premium Member over 3 years ago
Stress kills. Reading the news causes stress. QED
the lost wizard over 3 years ago
Cherry pick the results you want to see. Hunt around until you find an “expert” who agrees with point you’re trying to make. (This can take a while). Study is now complete and can be published with, hopefully, a Government grant.
Diane in comics land Premium Member over 3 years ago
The biggest problem is that those who report studies have no idea how to interpret them.
Bookworm over 3 years ago
I remember when milk was bad for you. A few years later, milk was good for you. I remember when eggs were bad for you. But it wasn’t long until eggs were good for you. I remember when sugar was good and bad for you, until it became both bad and good for you. I remember when nobody really knew what gluten was until somebody said gluten was bad for you. I remember being confused when “organic” foods were touted so highly, as I had never encountered and inorganic carrot.
The upshot is merely that I have pondered for years how in the world did the human race survive long enough to propagate itself without knowing if it’s food supply was good or bad for it?
marilynnbyerly over 3 years ago
My dad had a saying, “Everything in moderation, even moderation.” That includes foods that are “bad” for you.
zodismoon over 3 years ago
The best diet is the one that makes you happy.
Brent Rosenthal Premium Member over 3 years ago
Wrap that sucker in bacon!
zeexenon over 3 years ago
New study shows anti vaxxers should be eliminated from the herd.
ComicsBinger Premium Member over 3 years ago
Used to be every few years the ADA would change recommendations on how to brush teeth. I always did it the same and randomly I was correct. But now I use electric.
MichaelCody over 3 years ago
I read that smoking shortens one’s life – I quit smokingI read that eating red meat shortens one’s life – I stopped eating red meatI read that drinking shortens one’s life – I quit reading
michael3114 over 3 years ago
Studies, like polls, are only as reliable as the person doing them. More often than not, the conclusion is reached before the study begins.
GumbyDammit223 over 3 years ago
LOL OMG Pig! Even that is too much for me!
DCBakerEsq over 3 years ago
I prefer polls to studies.
txmystic over 3 years ago
Your fried stick of butter should be coated in powdered sugar.
You’re welcome!
knight1192a over 3 years ago
What, did Pastis go back to the mid-‘90s for this one? I know these studies still take place now and took place before the mid-’90s, but I remember a point there in the mid-‘90s where every week there was a new study which said to ignore the previous week’s study as that suddenly wasn’t bad for you but the study of the current week was.
David D Smith Premium Member over 3 years ago
Pig should try Homer Simpson’s favorite food, bacon wrapped sticks of butter (Pig shouldn’t get upset about the bacon, remember, he thinks those BLTs taste so darn good).
jonesbeltone over 3 years ago
Fried twinkes.
Display over 3 years ago
I was told a diet of fatty foods like fried sticks of butter was necessary. Hasn’t anyone else always been told, “Have to. They’re small” or did I hear that wrong?
asrialfeeple over 3 years ago
Reading about what can kill you can kill you. Studies showing 75 percent of the people make up 3/4 of humanity.
scpandich over 3 years ago
Mmm… fried butter…
WCraft Premium Member over 3 years ago
Watching the nightly news does one of two things: Make you a mindless zombie follower or Drives you Insane. Neither is a good alternative.
STACEY MARSHALL Premium Member over 3 years ago
Latest surveys show that 100% of people are fed up with people calling them up to do surveys.
MartinPerry1 over 3 years ago
There is a problem with scientific reporting. It’s that the authors feel the need for a click-baity title. You actually have to read the article to get what’s going on. How many here were at least momentarily confused that black holes were actually holograms? That’s what the titles implied. Read the article and all that is being claimed is that the math model for holograms also seems to be accurate on how black holes function.
Dianne50 over 3 years ago
I ignore all studies about what to eat. I figure I’ll just follow the examples set by my forebears. After all, they all lived into their 90s, except the few smokers in the bunch, and I share their DNA. I cook using recipes that have been handed down for several generations. I must admit, however, that it is getting harder and harder to find some of the ingredients I need.
Sisyphos over 3 years ago
Studies are like cars: designed for rapid obsolescence. After all, “studiers” need constant employment producing new studies. So, Pig’s solution is appropriate: just ignore the studies. Chances are your chances will not change.
On a personal note, my mother once told me that as an infant I crawled up onto the kitchen table, grabbed a quarter-pound stick of butter, and started to chew on it….
Rick Smith Premium Member over 3 years ago
No pig, go for the deep fried butter.
knottytippet over 3 years ago
The other reason is that news media have no skill or patience to actually read the “new study” and understand the methodology used to arrive at the conclusion. Also, it’s really important to look at what corporate interest group sponsored that new study, only paying for conclusions that support their industry.
Adam-Stone(Soup) over 3 years ago
Deep-fried butter (stick) …. Yum!
frenspz over 3 years ago
Pig, it says who cares about your fried stick of butter. Other than why do you have one.