Lolo Bardonik
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2006
- Messages
- 269
Studies show... Ever said, read, or repeated the phrases "studies show" or "they did a study" without actually reading the study and examining its funding, structure, design, and conclusions? I emphasize; its funding, its structure, its design, AND conclusions!!! We assume that journalists, writers, and doctors truly grasp the full meaning of a given piece of research before they speak or write about it. Unfortunately, that’s not always the case. One of the most important things to know about the scientific research on diet that’s often parroted in jew owned media is that whatever you’re told is probably not what it seems. When it comes to the state of modern scientific inquiry, we have signed for a delivery of a big old load of bull. Here is a rundown on a few of the most glaring issues in nutritional research. Relative Risk If you see a commercial for a statin drug, you may be told that its effectiveness nears some fantastical number—something like, say, a 33 percent “reduction in relative risk.” If someone who’s terrified of heart disease was told that there’s a drug that reduces the relative risk of a heart attack by 33 percent, he’d probably take it. But would he first ask what “relative risk” means?
Shane Ellison, a former pharmaceutical drug chemist, reveals what the concept truly means in his book Hidden Truth about Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs. Relative risk, in this case, is simply the difference—expressed as a percentage—between the outcomes observed in two different groups. Let’s say a group that takes statins is being compared to one that takes a placebo pill. Out of one hundred people in the statin group, two—2 percent—have a heart attack. Out of one hundred people in the placebo group, three—3 percent—have a heart attack. Comparing these two groups, you’d think that the difference in the incidence of heart attacks between the two groups would be just 1 percent, which could as easily be due to coincidence as it could be to effective medication. Is 1 percent enough of a difference to make you take a medication with a wide range of side effects, including deep muscle pain and memory loss? Probably not. So, instead of advertising that measly 1 percent, drug companies do something tricky: They massage the numbers. Since the difference between a 3 percent risk and a 2 percent risk is 1 percent, and 1 percent is one-third of 3 percent, they state that their product offers a 33 percent reduction in relative risk. (2/100) / (3/100) = 0.6667 Suddenly, 1 percent becomes 33 percent, and the cost-benefit ratio of taking a statin starts to look pretty darn good. They make up the math needed to sell their products and make money. Dietary Recall Studies Surveys are given to individuals who are expected to remember what they ate on a daily basis so that researchers can investigate possible connections between diet and the incidence of certain diseases. Sometimes participants fill out these surveys on a daily basis for more accurate reporting (who remembers what they ate last week?), but sometimes the surveys require an accurate memory of months and years of past habits. These studies are actually worthless Correlation vs Causation Correlation means that two variables have been observed in the same set of data; however, it does not mean that one variable directly causes the other. Causation does mean that one variable causes another. It’s rare that causation is proved at all; many studies merely report correlative data. For example, if I observe that countries where people eat lots of broccoli also have high rates of foot fungus, would it be reasonable to assume that broccoli causes foot fungus? Or could something else be at work? Just because broccoli intake and foot fungus are observed in the same set of data does not mean that eating broccoli causes someone to develop foot fungus. Yet this set of data could be reported in a manner that sounds an awful lot like causation to a layperson: “Broccoli consumption is correlated with foot fungus.” “Broccoli consumption is associated with foot fungus.” “Broccoli consumption increases the risk of foot fungus.” Another trick corporations and/or jew owned media are using trying to herd the sheep to buy their products Summary? Most studies that reach the jew owned media about nutrition are bullshit. They are based on corporation money intended to advertise/promote their product, change the lifestyle of people, or fit whatever purpose fits their agenda. Let's make a series of rhetorical questions... * Do you think that farmer X who creates pure and nutritious products on a local level would ever have the need to advertise on a global/international level? Nope! The product is nutritious and it sells itself. No need to advertise. * Who is the one that really NEEDS to support a product by studies, by endless advertising, by shameless promotion on media, by general brainwash? Someone who's product is shit. This smells kike shit. Isn't it?! Let's make the similarities obvious! It's the same old kike shit. Create a shit religion like xianity/islam etc. It's not worth shit and no-one in their right mind would follow that. SO THEY BRAINWASH THE PEOPLE. And the jews become rich by destroying lives and our true spirituality. And the same with shit products that destroy our health. These products don't worth shit and no-one would ever buy let alone eat those crap in a package. SO THEY BRAINWASH THE PEOPLE. And the jews become rich by destroying lives and their healthy bodies. It's simple; you eat crap (without knowing it most of the time) you develop incurable diseases. Our bodies are made by organic building blocks. We regenerate these blocks EVERY DAY until we stop and die. We regenerate by using organic building blocks from our food. IF THE FOOD IS SHIT, with artificial chemicals, unnatural building blocks, processed/destroyed building blocks, THEN OUR BODIES will rebuild our cells with SHIT building blocks. It's like, if you have an apartment/house and after a few years it needs to be re-painted. IF EVERY TIME THE PAINT CHIPS OFF you take your shit (literal shit) and smear it upon the walls covering the chipped paint, IN A FEW YEARS you'll have a house/apartment with shit covered walls. And you'll wonder, why there are so many flies over here? Why are the cockroaches love this place? To return from the surreal analogy to my point. We don't see what's in the processed corporation food, but we've been rebuilding our bodies' cells with that crap. We have been brainwashed by the corporations and we have to return to our roots. Re-tune our inner ability to "detect" good nutrition. Our bodies have been engineered to eat natural food, not worthless shit served to us by the jewish owned corporations in order to make them rich. In the following days, i'll post more about this very important issue. I'm not trying to spread some truth that no-one knows, but my point here is to cause awareness!
Hail Father Satan and All the Gods of Hell
Shane Ellison, a former pharmaceutical drug chemist, reveals what the concept truly means in his book Hidden Truth about Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs. Relative risk, in this case, is simply the difference—expressed as a percentage—between the outcomes observed in two different groups. Let’s say a group that takes statins is being compared to one that takes a placebo pill. Out of one hundred people in the statin group, two—2 percent—have a heart attack. Out of one hundred people in the placebo group, three—3 percent—have a heart attack. Comparing these two groups, you’d think that the difference in the incidence of heart attacks between the two groups would be just 1 percent, which could as easily be due to coincidence as it could be to effective medication. Is 1 percent enough of a difference to make you take a medication with a wide range of side effects, including deep muscle pain and memory loss? Probably not. So, instead of advertising that measly 1 percent, drug companies do something tricky: They massage the numbers. Since the difference between a 3 percent risk and a 2 percent risk is 1 percent, and 1 percent is one-third of 3 percent, they state that their product offers a 33 percent reduction in relative risk. (2/100) / (3/100) = 0.6667 Suddenly, 1 percent becomes 33 percent, and the cost-benefit ratio of taking a statin starts to look pretty darn good. They make up the math needed to sell their products and make money. Dietary Recall Studies Surveys are given to individuals who are expected to remember what they ate on a daily basis so that researchers can investigate possible connections between diet and the incidence of certain diseases. Sometimes participants fill out these surveys on a daily basis for more accurate reporting (who remembers what they ate last week?), but sometimes the surveys require an accurate memory of months and years of past habits. These studies are actually worthless Correlation vs Causation Correlation means that two variables have been observed in the same set of data; however, it does not mean that one variable directly causes the other. Causation does mean that one variable causes another. It’s rare that causation is proved at all; many studies merely report correlative data. For example, if I observe that countries where people eat lots of broccoli also have high rates of foot fungus, would it be reasonable to assume that broccoli causes foot fungus? Or could something else be at work? Just because broccoli intake and foot fungus are observed in the same set of data does not mean that eating broccoli causes someone to develop foot fungus. Yet this set of data could be reported in a manner that sounds an awful lot like causation to a layperson: “Broccoli consumption is correlated with foot fungus.” “Broccoli consumption is associated with foot fungus.” “Broccoli consumption increases the risk of foot fungus.” Another trick corporations and/or jew owned media are using trying to herd the sheep to buy their products Summary? Most studies that reach the jew owned media about nutrition are bullshit. They are based on corporation money intended to advertise/promote their product, change the lifestyle of people, or fit whatever purpose fits their agenda. Let's make a series of rhetorical questions... * Do you think that farmer X who creates pure and nutritious products on a local level would ever have the need to advertise on a global/international level? Nope! The product is nutritious and it sells itself. No need to advertise. * Who is the one that really NEEDS to support a product by studies, by endless advertising, by shameless promotion on media, by general brainwash? Someone who's product is shit. This smells kike shit. Isn't it?! Let's make the similarities obvious! It's the same old kike shit. Create a shit religion like xianity/islam etc. It's not worth shit and no-one in their right mind would follow that. SO THEY BRAINWASH THE PEOPLE. And the jews become rich by destroying lives and our true spirituality. And the same with shit products that destroy our health. These products don't worth shit and no-one would ever buy let alone eat those crap in a package. SO THEY BRAINWASH THE PEOPLE. And the jews become rich by destroying lives and their healthy bodies. It's simple; you eat crap (without knowing it most of the time) you develop incurable diseases. Our bodies are made by organic building blocks. We regenerate these blocks EVERY DAY until we stop and die. We regenerate by using organic building blocks from our food. IF THE FOOD IS SHIT, with artificial chemicals, unnatural building blocks, processed/destroyed building blocks, THEN OUR BODIES will rebuild our cells with SHIT building blocks. It's like, if you have an apartment/house and after a few years it needs to be re-painted. IF EVERY TIME THE PAINT CHIPS OFF you take your shit (literal shit) and smear it upon the walls covering the chipped paint, IN A FEW YEARS you'll have a house/apartment with shit covered walls. And you'll wonder, why there are so many flies over here? Why are the cockroaches love this place? To return from the surreal analogy to my point. We don't see what's in the processed corporation food, but we've been rebuilding our bodies' cells with that crap. We have been brainwashed by the corporations and we have to return to our roots. Re-tune our inner ability to "detect" good nutrition. Our bodies have been engineered to eat natural food, not worthless shit served to us by the jewish owned corporations in order to make them rich. In the following days, i'll post more about this very important issue. I'm not trying to spread some truth that no-one knows, but my point here is to cause awareness!
Hail Father Satan and All the Gods of Hell
