The next time you take studies as fact...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Darkwing48, Oct 2, 2009.

  1. Darkwing48

    Darkwing48 Heroic Decepticon

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    1,832
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Likes:
    +0
    Take a gander at this crap study.

    Eating Candy in Childhood Linked to Adult Crime - Yahoo! News

    So I guess if you love candy, aka, fat child, you most like will be a criminal.
    If you spank your children, they will be dumb and violent.

    Jeez, I'm glad people don't base there facts and prediection on these studies... uh oh.
     
  2. grimlock1972

    grimlock1972 "No Mas" My Wallet

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Posts:
    18,198
    News Credits:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    262
    Likes:
    +59
    OMFG how much money did they waste on that crap XD
     
  3. Foster

    Foster Super Mod

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Posts:
    32,067
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +11
    Wow, I'd better judge their research based soley on the headline written by an editor that didn't ever read the original work.
     
  4. funstorm

    funstorm Doer of nothing

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Posts:
    843
    Trophy Points:
    101
    Likes:
    +0
    I LOVE CANDY!!! i guess that means you guys will see me in the 6 o'clock news sooner or later
     
  5. MACRAPTRON

    MACRAPTRON Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2003
    Posts:
    3,442
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    202
    Likes:
    +8
    Alright people, let's start killing people around.
     
  6. Riltht

    Riltht Full-Time Doomsayer

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Posts:
    1,271
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Likes:
    +0
    I'll be watching for it.


    Either way, that's kind of a crap study, not provable in the least.
     
  7. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    Dude, I'm curious. What is it you do for a living? And what's your educational background? Because you've expressed, strongly, a number of opinions I find to be odd, and honestly, I'm just kinda wondering where they're coming from.

    Also, with regards to the study, the guy acknowledges that it raises questions. And he didn't made any kind of definitive statement about causation, merely correlation, which the data seems to bear out. It's not like he's an anti-candy crusader out to prove his point. Dude did some research and found something odd is all.

    I understand it's easier to just react to a throwaway title, and that typing is exciting, but back up a little and reread the article. It's not anywhere near as simple as you're presenting it.
     
  8. RodimusDawg

    RodimusDawg Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2007
    Posts:
    2,165
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    167
    Likes:
    +9
    Wow this study is crap. Because my affinity towards candy as a kid has led me to being too fat and lazy to kill. FAIL!!!!!!:lol 
     
  9. Bryan

    Bryan ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Posts:
    9,020
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +0
    What, specificially, does the study state that isn't provable?
     
  10. Scantron

    Scantron Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2004
    Posts:
    8,249
    News Credits:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    211
    Likes:
    +3
    Umm, did you even read the article you posted? Because there's an important couple of paragraphs near the end that clearly indicate that the authors are NOT saying "if you love candy, aka, fat child, you most like will be a criminal".

    And I don't know where "if you spank your children, they will be dumb and violent" comes from, since the article makes no mention of spanking.
     
  11. Cheetatron

    Cheetatron Eh

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2002
    Posts:
    4,710
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Likes:
    +0
    Think about it. If a kid ate candy super frequently as a child then chances are pretty good that their parents were awfully permissive that's probably where the more prone to violence results ultimately come from however that doesn't make for nearly as much fodder for conversation and wouldn't be much of a headline grabber.
     
  12. Edgewise

    Edgewise updated homage

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2002
    Posts:
    4,968
    News Credits:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    201
    Likes:
    +3
    If you did read the study, you didn't understand what they're actually saying. Bryan's already pointed out that the study talks about a correlation, not a causation.

    But also you say this:

    1st that is causation, not correlation. 2nd, your sentence means that greater than 50% of kids who eat too much candy will become criminals. This is not the same as what the study says:

    A large percentage of convicts turn out to have eaten a lot of candy is not the same as a large percentage of candy-eaters being destined to become criminals.
     
  13. Coeloptera

    Coeloptera Big, bad beetle-bot

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Posts:
    2,613
    Trophy Points:
    151
    Likes:
    +0
    You know...it could easily be phrased another way that helps imply causation too.

    *Ahem*

    Eating like shit in childhood could be a sign that you have substandard parents. Children with a shitty home environment have a higher likelihood of growing up to be criminals.

    You can phrase it any way you like, really. Doesn't make it science.

    *Sigh*

    Correlation of any 2 data points does not necessarily equal causation.

    But here's one thing, FTA:
    "One of those questions is whether sweets themselves contain compounds that promote antisocial and aggressive behavior, or whether the excessive eating of sweets represents a lack of discipline in childhood that translates to poor impulse control in adulthood. Moore is leaning toward the latter. It's possible that children who are given sweets too frequently never learn how to delay gratification - that is, they never develop enough patience to wait for things they want, leading to impulsivity in adulthood. It's also possible that children who are poorly behaved from the start tend to get more candy."

    But this didn't touch on what sort of parent would let their child eat candy every day, even though they said they controlled for parenting style, the very fact that the child could eat candy every single day implies there must be a distinction in parenting style between those and others.

    Not that poor nutrition in general may not have some effect on behavior. After all, malnourished animals are often quite dangerous.

    But the article doesn't give us enough real info to determine what the rest of the child's diet is like. If the parents allowed this high level of consumption, that makes them qualitatively distinct from parents who did not.

    - Coeloptera
     
  14. Darkwing48

    Darkwing48 Heroic Decepticon

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    1,832
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Likes:
    +0
    Programmer, A.K.A Problem solver. Engineers like to use process of elimination also to prove why something does work, how to make it better and get a certain output. 17,000 is a big sample size but the data that lead to assumed conclusion does not indicate 100%. There for, like on cigarette warning, the words "may, increase chances, and possibly" should be use on all conclusions in these studies. Especially this one. 69% percent eating candy almost every day. What the heck that means? Is "almost every day" based on a rate like 5 times a week, or 20 times a month. ( Note They are not the same because they could eat it as 2 twicee the first week and increase it near the last) What is the consumpution of these candies? If I take one nerd chunk and eat it once a day, that's everyday, vs. a candybar. They are trying to say that eating a good diet is a sign of or abilities to want to engage in risky behaviors, although, crime itself isn't as black or white?

    Oh yeah, though I have said it before, and will say it again, that studies or simplified.


    That was from other crappy studies. Read the papers and watch news a lot. "Studies will show up." Imagine, read the academic periodicals at your library, a lot of it ends up nowhere.
     
  15. Foster

    Foster Super Mod

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2003
    Posts:
    32,067
    News Credits:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    312
    Likes:
    +11
    :lolol 
     
  16. MetalRyde

    MetalRyde is an a-hole with a heart.

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2007
    Posts:
    12,991
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Location:
    Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
    Likes:
    +64
    ...so their years of research says that...

    ...candy is bad for you...

    ...does anyone know where im getting at here?
     
  17. Dinobot Nuva

    Dinobot Nuva Johnny 3 Tears Veteran

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Posts:
    7,968
    News Credits:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    221
    Likes:
    +15
    Correlation isn't saying causation. C'mon people, read.
     
  18. Jarodimus

    Jarodimus the guy with that scan Veteran TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Posts:
    9,443
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    251
    Likes:
    +11
    ICE CREAM CONSUMPTION IN FRANCE LINKED STRONGLY WITH SWIMMING POOL DEATHS IN U.S.

    True story.
     
  19. Darkwing48

    Darkwing48 Heroic Decepticon

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Posts:
    1,832
    Trophy Points:
    136
    Likes:
    +0
    Data Correlation does lead into causation. The researcher did "eliminate other factors" Read his conclusion, if he wants to call it that.
     
  20. Jarodimus

    Jarodimus the guy with that scan Veteran TFW2005 Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Posts:
    9,443
    News Credits:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    251
    Likes:
    +11
    I see absolutely nothing where the researcher indicates he believes there's a causal link.
     

Share This Page