The use of poor information to promote an initiative aimed at creating an informed consumer is a defining flaw of the Proposition 37 campaign.
More like this
I recently finished a biography o
So that stuff I said about Obama winning? Not so much. Ditto for the parts were I predicted an Obama sweep of CT, MA, NJ. Of those, he took only CT, making my predictions pretty crappy.
Just like a giant, well controlled, negative result right wing ideology has been repudiated. If I were a card-carrying member of the GOP, I would take a long look at the last 8 years, and a hard look at the demographics of this election.
I'm sort of on a roll of unpleasantly political posts lately, which I try to avoid. I can't really not link Scalzi on the framing of gay marriage, though:
Seralini comments that it would have been better to have tested 600 rats rather than 200, but then the study would have cost $26 million, not $4 million. "
I am not sure why testing 3 times the rats would have cost 6.5 times as much. I am also not sure I understand why it costs millions to feed a couple of hundred rats even allowing for documenting and testing costs. I am not a researcher so I have no basis for comparison. Are those numbers within the norm for a test of this type?
The cost for a project like this is mostly due to personnel. It is hard to imagine that costs for 2 people for 2 years would be more than $1M but perhaps there are additional costs for permits to experiment on rats. I also cannot understand why having 3x more rats would cost so much money. But then there is a lot that scientists do not understand about this project...