4 ms·

Let's face it, the majority of the population lazily look for simple formulas along the lines of "(Don't) do this, and you'll get that". Media panders to that w

Let's face it, the majority of the population lazily look for simple formulas along the lines of "(Don't) do this, and you'll get that". Media panders to that when drawing conclusions from studies often leaving out most or all of the important details. 99% of folks out there hear of these studies via media and not by reading research papers. Meanwhile most simple formulas of this kind are not worth the energy it takes to draw the pixels given the profound variety of genetic and environmental factors at play. I find the suggestion at the end of this article truly pathetic: "Some medical experts say the problems with lifestyle studies are so overwhelming — and the chance of finding anything reproducible and meaningful so small — that it might be best to just give up on those questions altogether." This is typical big media bullshit pandering to the inert. I mean come on... How about we don't give up on questions? How about we learn to ask the right questions instead? How about we spend more time training and studying our own bodies than we spend reading our Facebook feeds?

stdbrouw 10y ago
I don't think you could've written anything more arrogant if you tried. > the majority of the population lazily look for simple formulas Great! After all, it's not that different from "a good programmer is a lazy programmer" and "keep it simple, stupid" -- if at all possible, look for simple solutions and quick fixes. > This is typical big media bullshit pandering to the inert. "Epidemiology--is it time to call it a day?" (http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/1.full http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/1.full), an essay that comes to pretty much the same conclusion as this article, was published in 2001 in the International Journal of Epidemiology. As far as I know the International Journal of Epidemiology is not big media. > I mean come on... How about we don't give up on questions? Rhetorical questions don't count as arguments. > How about we learn to ask the right questions instead? Observational research is intrinsically very, very hard. Statisticians are working at making it more reliable (especially in the context of causal inference: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/miguel-hernan/causal-inference-book/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/miguel-hernan/causal-inference-...), but there's only so much you can do with data that is full of noise and confounders. > How about we spend more time training and studying our own bodies than we spend reading our Facebook feeds? You don't get to decide other people's priorities in life.
- hinkley 10y ago
  > if at all possible, look for simple solutions and quick fixes. Oh boy. I'm not OP but you and I could easily have the same altercation. Quick fixes and simple solutions are two different tools, and conflating the [two] leads to endless disagreements and hurt feelings. Pascal and de Saint-Exupery both have famous quotes that apply to the distinctions between the two.
  - CodeMage 10y ago
    I know I can look those quotes up, but that endeavor will most likely end up ramifying into a lot more procrastination than I can afford right now. Could you post those quotes?
    - hinkley 10y ago
      A letter from Blaise Pascal to a colleague starts, "I apologize for the length of this letter. It would have been shorter if I'd had more time." Exupery has the one about perfection being achieved when there is nothing left to take away. I confess you have to unpack that one a bit to turn it into a commentary on simplicity and how it's challenging to achieve. There's the one attributed to Einstein about 'as simple as possible but no simpler', and for some reason I occasionally swap the two in my head. Any problem is easy to solve if you misunderstand it properly.
- DiabloD3 10y ago
  >You don't get to decide other people's priorities in life. No, but let's not bullshit ourselves and claim half the population is not dangerously addicted to the mental equivalent of "junk food", ex: Facebook. Don't want to be fat? Then don't be fat. Want to be fat? Wasting hours on Facebook will help you achieve your goal.
hinkley 10y ago
I read a beautiful anti-anti-participation rant recently that I thought did a great job of arguing that showing up is half the battle, and so heck yeah you should get kudos just for showing up. Some people try to go their whole lives without showing up for anything. You should be encouraged to get off your ass and try. Convincing yourself that everything is pointless is a self fulfilling prophecy.
- humanrebar 10y ago
  Convincing yourself that everything is meaningful is also a self fulfilling prophecy. I understand what you're saying, and they are certainly valid thoughts. I might even agree, largely. But there's not much objective in what you expressed.
  - ricardobeat 10y ago
    You mean to say his point is meaningless?
    - betenoire 10y ago
      it's kind of a tautology. Convincing yourself <of anything> is a self-fulfilling prophecy when it determines your next actions.
      - hinkley 10y ago
        maybe 'self-defeating' would have been a better choice of words.
    - humanrebar 10y ago
      Well, not quite. Showing up is half the battle, maybe. But that sentiment assumes the choice of battle is correct. I thought some more factual objections would help clarify whether this is the battle to show up for.
humanrebar 10y ago
> How about we don't give up on questions? What would it take for you to change your mind on this? There are certainly limits to inductive reasoning. And there's probably a limit when it comes to understanding complicated systems with observation. It's valid to ask whether we have reached some of those limits and how we can know in general. The same smart researchers (and the excitement of the general public) could be focusing on more tractable problems. Maybe carbon capture or inexpensive desalination.
- tigerBL00D 10y ago
  That particular sentence is just a rhetorical bridge from the quote. I am really suggesting that it is quite possible to forgo one or two hours of Facebook and Netflix a day and invest that time into asking questions about self. Exercising. Studying biological responses to nutrition strategies and various stressors. One can learn useful stuff armed with sufficient time, gadgets from Amazon, software, and the Internet. And one can demand even more useful tools with his or her wallet.
blfr 10y ago
the majority of the population lazily look for simple formulas along the lines of "(Don't) do this, and you'll get that". I don't know about population level effects but the Internet (more random blogs than the big media) has delivered a super simple formula (cutting carbs, lifting weights Starting Strength-style) which works every time I stick to it and in mere weeks. Perhaps it's not the demand for simplicity driving this nonsense but the opposite -- trying hard to sound smart at the dinner parties and avoiding obvious answers. Then again, my workout is not nearly as fun as CrossFit, and my conversations about it rarely last longer than two minutes.
- jschwartzi 10y ago
  Yeah, people stopped asking me how I lost so much weight when they found out my only answer was to count calories and lift weights.
  - DiabloD3 10y ago
    No one wants a simple answer. I find people, in general, to be goddamned fucking annoying because of behaviors like this.
    - antisthenes 10y ago
      No, in fact they CRAVE a simple answer. But a simple answer doesn't mean the solution doesn't require hard work or sacrifice. It's not wrong to desire maximum results with minimum effort. But some things just don't have shortcuts as good as the others.

stdbrouw 10y ago

I don't think you could've written anything more arrogant if you tried. > the majority of the population lazily look for simple formulas Great! After all, it's not that different from "a good programmer is a lazy programmer" and "keep it simple, stupid" -- if at all possible, look for simple solutions and quick fixes. > This is typical big media bullshit pandering to the inert. "Epidemiology--is it time to call it a day?" (http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/1.full http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/1.full), an essay that comes to pretty much the same conclusion as this article, was published in 2001 in the International Journal of Epidemiology. As far as I know the International Journal of Epidemiology is not big media. > I mean come on... How about we don't give up on questions? Rhetorical questions don't count as arguments. > How about we learn to ask the right questions instead? Observational research is intrinsically very, very hard. Statisticians are working at making it more reliable (especially in the context of causal inference: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/miguel-hernan/causal-inference-book/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/miguel-hernan/causal-inference-...), but there's only so much you can do with data that is full of noise and confounders. > How about we spend more time training and studying our own bodies than we spend reading our Facebook feeds? You don't get to decide other people's priorities in life.

hinkley 10y ago
> if at all possible, look for simple solutions and quick fixes. Oh boy. I'm not OP but you and I could easily have the same altercation. Quick fixes and simple solutions are two different tools, and conflating the [two] leads to endless disagreements and hurt feelings. Pascal and de Saint-Exupery both have famous quotes that apply to the distinctions between the two.
- CodeMage 10y ago
  I know I can look those quotes up, but that endeavor will most likely end up ramifying into a lot more procrastination than I can afford right now. Could you post those quotes?
  - hinkley 10y ago
    A letter from Blaise Pascal to a colleague starts, "I apologize for the length of this letter. It would have been shorter if I'd had more time." Exupery has the one about perfection being achieved when there is nothing left to take away. I confess you have to unpack that one a bit to turn it into a commentary on simplicity and how it's challenging to achieve. There's the one attributed to Einstein about 'as simple as possible but no simpler', and for some reason I occasionally swap the two in my head. Any problem is easy to solve if you misunderstand it properly.
DiabloD3 10y ago
>You don't get to decide other people's priorities in life. No, but let's not bullshit ourselves and claim half the population is not dangerously addicted to the mental equivalent of "junk food", ex: Facebook. Don't want to be fat? Then don't be fat. Want to be fat? Wasting hours on Facebook will help you achieve your goal.

hinkley 10y ago

I read a beautiful anti-anti-participation rant recently that I thought did a great job of arguing that showing up is half the battle, and so heck yeah you should get kudos just for showing up. Some people try to go their whole lives without showing up for anything. You should be encouraged to get off your ass and try. Convincing yourself that everything is pointless is a self fulfilling prophecy.

humanrebar 10y ago
Convincing yourself that everything is meaningful is also a self fulfilling prophecy. I understand what you're saying, and they are certainly valid thoughts. I might even agree, largely. But there's not much objective in what you expressed.
- ricardobeat 10y ago
  You mean to say his point is meaningless?
  - betenoire 10y ago
    it's kind of a tautology. Convincing yourself <of anything> is a self-fulfilling prophecy when it determines your next actions.
    - hinkley 10y ago
      maybe 'self-defeating' would have been a better choice of words.
  - humanrebar 10y ago
    Well, not quite. Showing up is half the battle, maybe. But that sentiment assumes the choice of battle is correct. I thought some more factual objections would help clarify whether this is the battle to show up for.

humanrebar 10y ago

> How about we don't give up on questions? What would it take for you to change your mind on this? There are certainly limits to inductive reasoning. And there's probably a limit when it comes to understanding complicated systems with observation. It's valid to ask whether we have reached some of those limits and how we can know in general. The same smart researchers (and the excitement of the general public) could be focusing on more tractable problems. Maybe carbon capture or inexpensive desalination.

tigerBL00D 10y ago
That particular sentence is just a rhetorical bridge from the quote. I am really suggesting that it is quite possible to forgo one or two hours of Facebook and Netflix a day and invest that time into asking questions about self. Exercising. Studying biological responses to nutrition strategies and various stressors. One can learn useful stuff armed with sufficient time, gadgets from Amazon, software, and the Internet. And one can demand even more useful tools with his or her wallet.

blfr 10y ago

the majority of the population lazily look for simple formulas along the lines of "(Don't) do this, and you'll get that". I don't know about population level effects but the Internet (more random blogs than the big media) has delivered a super simple formula (cutting carbs, lifting weights Starting Strength-style) which works every time I stick to it and in mere weeks. Perhaps it's not the demand for simplicity driving this nonsense but the opposite -- trying hard to sound smart at the dinner parties and avoiding obvious answers. Then again, my workout is not nearly as fun as CrossFit, and my conversations about it rarely last longer than two minutes.

jschwartzi 10y ago
Yeah, people stopped asking me how I lost so much weight when they found out my only answer was to count calories and lift weights.
- DiabloD3 10y ago
  No one wants a simple answer. I find people, in general, to be goddamned fucking annoying because of behaviors like this.
  - antisthenes 10y ago
    No, in fact they CRAVE a simple answer. But a simple answer doesn't mean the solution doesn't require hard work or sacrifice. It's not wrong to desire maximum results with minimum effort. But some things just don't have shortcuts as good as the others.