3 ms·

Correlation =/= causation. I would argue that the bacteria shows up AFTER the body has been damaged through a lack of nutrition/minerals/vitamins/probiotics/etc

by gnoppa 7y ago

Correlation =/= causation. I would argue that the bacteria shows up AFTER the body has been damaged through a lack of nutrition/minerals/vitamins/probiotics/etc. and an overload of toxins.

SketchySeaBeast 7y ago
> and an overload of toxins Which ones?
tuxracer 7y ago
"No, correlation does not imply causation, but it sure as hell provides a hint." https://slate.com/technology/2012/10/correlation-does-not-imply-causation-how-the-internet-fell-in-love-with-a-stats-class-cliche.html https://slate.com/technology/2012/10/correlation-does-not-im... > I would argue that the bacteria shows up AFTER the body has been damaged through...an overload of toxins Not sure what this is based on. What does "toxins" even mean in this context?
- tasty_freeze 7y ago
  When this comes up, my stock answer is: No, correlation is not causation, but it is correlated with causation.