Too bad I already made the mugs for the Chemical Physics Journal Club this year, because that plot would have been perfect! I can’t believe this stuff can get published! This is why people are starting to claim that most published research findings are false.
The authors must be fat, ’cause they’re pretty stupid. Isn’t that awesome? The funniest part is that they worked so hard to adjust for all these different parameters, and still got a complete scatter. Linear shape?!? Looks more like a big fat (pun intended) blob to me. This cross-sectional association between BMI at baseline and cognitive scores persisted after adjustment for age, sex, educational level, physical activity, and region of residence and had a linear shape (figure). I swear to god, this is a quote from the paper describing that figure (this is not taken out of context, read it for yourself):
#FAQT PEOPLE ARE STUPID PLUS#
They report the correlations (such as -0.008 +/- 0.13) that are the equivalent of saying, “There are 3 people in this room … plus or minus 300.” or read the PDF: cournot_fat_stupid_neuro_2006.pdf) try to argue that there is a negative correlation between body-mass index (BMI) and cognative function (i.e. et al.Relation between body mass index and cognitive function in healthy middle-aged men and women.
OK, this one wins the worst-figure contest: Fat = stupid? Octoat 8:05 pm | sam | crazy figure contest, literature
0 kommentar(er)
