Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost Dog
Most people don't count calories or look at portion sizes. Sometimes the fat ones swap out the Coke for the Diet Coke and hope for the best.
|
I consider that Darwinism. The information about what is healthy and what has the greatest chance of working is out there. If they disregard it and go with fallacy, it's Darwinism, pure and simple.
Quote:
|
The study had nothing to do with counting or thinking.
|
How many rats can you say have cognizant self-control? That's the bottom line. Humans are so unique in the world, I don't see how we can apply so many rat studies to humans.
Quote:
|
As to studies on rats not being accurate when applied to people, is there a good percentage of these studies that don't pan out? I know the Sweet n Low thing, but what others are bad?
|
If rats are so genetically similar to humans, why don't they have opposable thumbs? Why do they have mating cycles?
Why rats over monkeys? Chimps? Chimps are 99.4% genetically similar to humans. I seem to remember that a lot of mammals are within 95% genetic similarity to humans, some that have little in common with humans, except that they have one nose with two nostrils, two eyes, ears to listen with, give birth to live young, etc. I'm still trying to find how close rats and mice are to humans. Still, enough distinction to make me look sideways at any study on rats applied to humans.
I'd like to think we're all a bit more intellectually capable and physically evolved than rats, but hey, if rats are the key to knowing what drives humans instincts and behavior...I have a sudden urge to rummage through my garbage.
I'm still going to stand by the idea that studies on rats are going to shine a light on rat behaviors.