Hugh Pickens writes:
Scott Adams of Dilbert fame writes on his blog that science's biggest fail of all time is 'everything about diet and fitness':
I used to think fatty food made you fat. Now it seems the opposite is true. Eating lots of peanuts, avocados, and cheese, for example, probably decreases your appetite and keeps you thin. I used to think vitamins had been thoroughly studied for their health trade-offs. They haven’t. The reason you take one multivitamin pill a day is marketing, not science. I used to think the U.S. food pyramid was good science. In the past it was not, and I assume it is not now. I used to think drinking one glass of alcohol a day is good for health, but now I think that idea is probably just a correlation found in studies.
According to Adams, the direct problem of science is that it has been collectively steering an entire generation toward obesity, diabetes, and coronary problems. But the indirect problem might be worse: It is hard to trust science because it has a credibility issue that it earned. "I think science has earned its lack of credibility with the public. If you kick me in the balls for 20-years, how do you expect me to close my eyes and trust you?"
That dude's hilarious sometimes, but this is an epic fail.
So the National Association of Turd in a Jar Manufacturers pays off their hired politicians to "fix" the government dietary guidelines to include their product (what a huge surprise our largest donor makes the healthiest food!), then hires some acting school dropout who's only scientific achievement was to fail "rocks for jocks" in college to wear a lab coat and describe himself as a scientist in TV commercials telling Judge Judy watchers that the .gov says their product is healthier than mother's milk and more american than apple pie. Meanwhile they fund 50 real studies with a wink and a nudge to starving grad students that they're really like a certain result, and finally some ethically agonized starving grad student earns his pizza money by extending the error bars to maybe include the paid for conclusion, and that one out of fifty studies gets press released to hell and back and the grad students gets some blackjack and hookers, assuming they actually pay up (never trust a crook...).
Then this dude comes along and says the problem with the above scenario is ... wait for it ... "scientists". What a load of BS. It might be that his satire is getting a little too biting for the average moron.... nah, he just sucks today. Draw me some ISO9000 cartoons and all will be forgiven.
I'd also love to see more biting send-ups of ISO9000 and similar standards. They seem to manufacture years of work from thin air, whilst getting in the way of real work; a sort of industry sponsored red tape factory.