nostr:npub1ecj3mfr9lzvx7wh6fmh59vz6eet324mdtdlp9qxzqvwuvpglwnxqv6fchy nostr:npub1y6vdaj364w37g40r42f8apzjjxfzulnepyf4llpthmguqffg302svdqwnv nostr:npub176q6ywgn4tuvj2czlxwg6tspzwh4h5dyetkeug8y9ktgmhw0m38sn8lzcq Thank you CMD for taking a closer look at this. This is such an egregious instance of lying with statistics that I think it'll be one of my go-to examples with normies

I looked at the paper, available at https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/17/3795 , which is hilariously titled "Demographic and Socioeconomic Correlates of Disproportionate Beef Consumption among US Adults in an Age of Global Warming."

Their entire contribution can be summed up in one table (see pic). I want turn this data into a story. I'm not gonna say anything that's not obvious to you, but hopefully it's at least entertaining.

Imagine that America consists of just two places to eat: a gigantic food court called Nutritional Institute of Globalists (NIG), and a small hole-in-the-wall place called Sneed's All-Chuck Burger Shop. The NIG restaurants only serve tiny portions of beef, while every dish at Sneed's is pure red meat and guaranteed to satisfy.

Some hardworking scientists spent months surveying people about what they ate at these restaurants, and the authors of the present study lazily just used the first day of the other scientists' data.

Sneed's is a small place - they're only big enough to accommodate 12% of the population on any given day. People tend to go there as a treat, which is why the clientele there skews slightly wealthy, but not a lot. Some college graduates don't go to Sneed's because they're sick of getting called "city slickers" by the staff. (23% of people have college degrees in general, but within the restaurant that drops to 18%.)

Men dine at Sneed's a bit more often than women do, but it's not a sausage-fest. On that day, 58% of the people eating at Sneed's were male, and that implies (since the authors of this study are disgusting transphobes) that 42% of the diners were female. For comparison, at the NIG restaurants, 47% of patrons were male and 53% were female.

Why might that be the case? Should you scrap your plans to meet your red-blooded monoeye tradwife at the old-timey railroad-themed bar wedged into the back of Sneed's restaurant? The authors of the study think it's cultural: Sneed's bull and cowboy decorations probably don't help; the bust size of the waitresses who work there *definitely* don't help. But I can think of at least two other reasons why they saw more men at Sneed's that day:

- Men need more calories, and the meals at Sneed's keep you full for way longer than the grain bowls you get at NIG restaurants. "On average, women need 1600 to 2200 calories per day while men need 2000 to 3200 calories per day" (Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics). Their study defines "disproportionate beef consumption" (a.k.a. a 'big meal' of beef) using an assumed caloric intake of 2200 calories, which basically makes male vs. female comparisons meaningless. A 'big meal' for a man is not the same as a 'big meal' for a woman.

- A common feminist refrain is that "a woman makes 75 cents for every dollar a man makes." If it's true that men have more money, that alone might explain why Sneed's patrons on that day were 58% male. After all, all the delicious burgers and steaks at Sneed's are made to order, so the food there isn't cheap, and we've already established that their patrons skew wealthy a little bit. Could it be that, if women made as much as men, they would treat themselves to Sneed's more often?

There are other potential factors of bias that they study authors didn't control for. For example, if they happened to do this study on a day which falls during Ramadan, that could significantly skew the results. There's no way to tell from their table alone, because (like the despicable racists they are) their "race/ethnicity" category completely erases Middle Easterners. You could look at the original diet survey study, though, and see what day it started on.

In summary, Sneed's clientele do follow some noticeable mild trends, but they are basically just ... normal. This study is a piece of shit and the authors should be disbarred from science. I might be a Non-Hispanic Asian (lowest rate of "disproportionate beef consumption" out of all the populations they looked at), but I think I'll treat myself to a bacon cheeseburger at Sneed's tonight.