nuance in science
which is lost in debate on
Boy! What might this haiku be based on today?
Howdy, what might NOT this haiku be based on today?
With all the possible topics at hand, I got the words for this haiku from an article titled, “Coffee bad, red wine good? Top food myths busted.”
The article takes on those awful bane’s of life today of red meat, coffee, red wine, plant milk and other awful anxiety causing additives that keep me up at night when I don’t have anything else to worry about.
I read the article not with a grain of salt but a bag, a pile, a State of Michigan Department of Highways salt spreader dump truck of salt.
I read the article more from the point of a humorous essay that a factual report.
The idea that statistically speaking (always get ready when that is spelled out) there are more health problems connected with moderate wine drinking … because there or so many more moderate wine drinkers is a line out of a Marx Brothers movie.
When I make presentations about the online world, I like to mention that a high percentage of people who visit a given website are most likely using the world wide web but most folks write that down in their notes.
I think it was Ricky Bobby who pointed out that on average, 97.5% of all people will die.
I am old enough to know that everything and nothing is bad for you.
You just have to pick your terms and go from there.
But the article did have two lines that I really liked.
The last line could have been predicted by anyone who had every heard, watched or read a report on what foods are good for you.
The last line says, “As with all things, moderation is key.”
Eating an apple a day keeps the doctor away, right?
Eating 100 apples will keep everyone else away due to the bodily production of internal methane gas as well as most likely kill you.
Moderation is key.
Gee wiz AND Boy Howdy!
The line I really liked was, when Rob Percival, author of The Meat Paradox: Eating, Empathy and the Future of Meat, was quoted saying, “But there’s nuance in the science, which isn’t often communicated in the press and is lost in the debate on social media,” he says.“
Mr. Percival, speaking as an expert in the politics of meat, is talking about the science of red meat being bad for you when he said, “But there’s nuance in the science …”
But that sentence is just too cool to not let stand alone as a judgment on the last 20 years or so about anything.
But there’s nuance in the science, which isn’t often communicated in the press and is lost in the debate on social media.
And please be aware, it is not just the numbers.
As I am talking about food, I am sure everyone knows that eggs are bad for you.
Eggs are bad for you as they are high in cholesterol.
And cholesterol is bad for you.
Everyone knows that.
Do you know why we know that?
Back in 1966 President Lyndon Johnson read in his morning paper that the cost of a dozen eggs was higher then it had ever been in history and LBJ went all LBJ on his staff to bring the price of eggs down!
One effort involved the USDA releasing anything and everything it had that was bad about eggs.
The next night every major evening newscast (all three of them) carried the story that according to US Government sources, eggs were high in cholesterol and while they weren’t sure what that meant, it wasn’t good.
And the price of eggs dropped.
And that message about evil eggs has stayed in the collective conscience of the American mind ever since.
Just google ‘eggs LBJ’ if you want to look it up.
If I am not getting my point across, maybe there is a nuance in the science, which isn’t often communicated in the press and is lost in the debate on social media.