New study with red wine came out today also. Which tries to explain the "french paradox"... it supported information we know ALREADY. It's just as dumb that article about how pets can get sick from people (its been known for 200+ years). Makes me wonder if these articles were timed. There have been many epidimological works of much greater sample sizes which show meat and fat consumption actually reducing cancer risk... the opposite of what these nitwits published. The government spent billions trying to prove what these nitwits think they've proved through epidimological work... and the government failed to prove it even when they used pure experimentation. Did they isolate the variable they were testing? Epidimological data is considered soft data... and the government even used hard data and was unable to show fat or meat causing any increase in heart disease. Its rather funny when you compare hard data with soft data lol. There data is very soft. Looking at epidimological data from the nurses study (100,000+), There is no relationship... just the reduction of all forms of cancer... . The last study was brought up in my friends medical ethics class. I wonder if this one will also show up too. I wish university's would just use IQ scores as a requirment for enterence. Too many stupid people out there with every degree you can imagine. Oh, also a IQ requirment to teach. Thats the heart of the problem. I graduated earing 65,000. My professor earns 45k. My high school teachers tended to be a LOT smarter then my college professors, and I went to a ivy league school. People are just paid what their worth. No reason for a 70 or 80 IQ to get a Ph.D It destroy's education... and I think its destroying science.