I recently learned from TV that Colgate is the No.1 dentist recommendation in Russia. And this statement is even based on some kind of poll. I took two commercials: the 14th and the 15th year. Both times, the surveys were carried out by marketing companies, but in neither case, I did not find the sources of the research. But then I came across an article from which I found out that the British authorities had forbidden Colgate to advertise under this slogan. The fact is that the survey on which this statement was based was interesting to put it mildly: dentists were asked to choose between brushing their teeth with or without paste. Of course, most dentists recommended using a paste. And since Colgate is a paste, so most experts recommend Colgate!
Yes, everything is so bad.
Or here's another ad for a soap that kills 99.9% of harmful bacteria. In fact, such a result was obtained only in laboratory conditions, in a test tube, and in real life only 46% is destroyed, but, of course, you will not be told about this.
These are, of course, the most innocent cases of misleading statistics, most people watching such ads understand that this is not true, but how exactly the deception occurs, we often do not know.
A person who is not versed in data collection methods and statistics can only rely on intuition. When we are told that the average salary in Russia is 41 thousand rubles, a vague doubt creeps in that something is wrong here, but if the lie is not so obvious and is done wisely, you will fall for it. One hundred percent.
For example, here is a large-scale scientific study that found that butter, despite all the warnings of doctors, turns out to be not harmful. The Times even ran a magazine spreading the good news of the product's health benefits, with a cover that temptingly read "Eat butter!"
However, in the study itself, scientists compared the butter to a typical American diet: buns, soda and junk food. Even in this comparison, the fatality rate for oil consumption was 1% higher. So what exactly have scientists discovered, the benefits of oil? Not. The maximum is that it is slightly worse than candy and cakes. Agree, this is a little different from loud headlines. And it’s impossible to defend against them if you don’t tackle the issue yourself, studying research, reading press releases and scientific reports. The common man simply does not have the tools to recognize lies in statistics.
And this weakness is exploited by everyone.
Promotional video:
For example, recently on the channel I talked about the benefits of berries, and this is good for you. But what about the big manufacturers? The berries do not last long on the shelves, and it is very difficult to make money on them. Therefore, the food industry tries to process them as much as possible and cram them into some kind of bar that will not deteriorate for 20 years. Of course, all the benefits of wagering berries will evaporate, and in advertising it will not be possible to say that the bar is useful. But if you pay the researchers, you can paint a pretty picture. Here is one such study. See what miraculous effects berry pills have on brain health compared to a placebo! You can even put this graph on your website and write something about the power of blueberries.
Now notice that the Y-axis starts at 20, not zero. If you build a graph according to all the rules, then the effect will cease to seem so great. This is a classic example of misinformation, you are not deceived, but the data is presented in such a way that you think correctly. Both in advertising and in political agitation, you will most often be told the truth, but you will never know the full truth.
This is especially true with alcohol. Take, for example, this study from a blogger video. It revealed that people who drink a little live longer than everyone else. However, as always, things are not so simple. People were conditionally divided into three groups. Drinking a lot, drinking a little, and not drinking. Of the three groups, those who consume alcohol in moderation, from 1 to 4 drinks per day, statistically survived the longest.
But the clue is that a significant part of the group of non-drinkers is those who have recently stopped drinking. And they quit drinking just because of health problems. Technically they are teetotal, yes, but we don't know for how long or why they don't. In this case, it is not surprising that drinkers gradually lived longer than nondrinkers.
If you control this parameter or find studies of people who abstain from drinking for life, it turns out that THEY live longer than others. However, if you do not know these nuances, it will be very difficult to understand where the catch is. You may even start drinking. I do not advise, by the way, it directly damages the testicles.
Mark Twain once said: "There is a lie, there is a blatant lie, and there is statistics." And this phrase should be your motto when consuming information. Unfortunately, even if you are very smart, you will not be able to tell the truth from the false right away. Therefore, the correct attitude to any data that you do not deal with personally, including mine, is a healthy skepticism.