Were we not just talking about the shortcomings of epidemiological studies a few days ago? Short synopsis: they’re usually only good enough for government work – until they’re not even that good. (h/t Clarice)
Unfortunately, it’s beginning to look like the study that reported the early success of Lady M’s No Child’s Fat Behind program was bogus.
If the news last month that the prevalence of obesity among American preschoolers had plunged 43 percent in a decade sounded too good to be true, that's because it probably was, researchers say.
When the study was published in late February in the Journal of the American Medical Association, no one had a ready explanation for that astounding finding by researchers at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Indeed, it seemed to catch the experts by surprise.
What? No 43% reduction in obesity rates of 2-5 year olds after all? How could that have happened?
We are investigating the possibility of sabotage. Butt more likely it’s the result of the complex Common Core number bonds used in the study,
As with many of these
sloppy scientific propaganda epidemiological studies, there were methodology issues:
The problem lies in large measure with the small sample size of the CDC study and its relatively large margin of error.
Yeah, that’s generally the case. So despite Lady M’s best efforts it looks like we haven’t yet won the hearts and minds of children when it comes to loving those yummy vegetables.
Maybe what we really need, in order to cut the obesity rate in children, is a reduction in unrestricted Food Stamp programs, and those new “free” school breakfasts - where kids who’ve already had a good breakfast at home can pick up an extra juice pack and delicious donut.
Anyway, my point is if we can’t even get a simple study tracking kids’ weights right, what chance do have of tracking how many people have enrolled (and paid) for Obamacare coverage? Much less track a 777 that’s gone missing due to what is beginning to sound more and more like a highly sophisticated computer programming heist for nefarious purposes?
No wonder the Russians have joined ranks with the Belgians and French, who have been laughing at us for years now. The Russians first clue that they were dealing with a hapless American administration was Secretary of State Clinton’s presentation of the “Reset” button that was swiped from a Jacuzzi in Geneva and presented to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov:
Clinton presented Lavrov with a gift-wrapped red button, which said "Reset" in English and "Peregruzka" in Russian. The problem was, "peregruzka" doesn't mean reset. It means overcharged, or overloaded.
Is anybody else around here beginning to think we might be on the wrong side of history here?
Not to worry comrades, BHO was quick to impose sanctions on a handful of Russians he’s deemed responsible for the Crimea action. It won’t change anything butt it certainly is petty, personal and irritating. So we’ve got that going for us.
TODAY’S IMPORTANT TAKE-AWAY:
Do not trust any
- government agency
- “professional” journal
As they are all political entities utilized by zealots and lobbyists to advance their own agendas in order to extract maximum benefit for themselves and their benefactors, and exert maximum control.
Posted from: Michelle Obama’s Mirror