

Does chocolate make you clever? - JumpCrisscross
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20356613

======
lutusp
"Data mining" strikes again. Find a meaningless correlation, one having
nothing to do with anything, then publish it, along with a bogus explanation
that pretends the random, chance correlation represents a cause-effect
relationship.

The article pays lip service to the very high probability that the correlation
means precisely nothing, but this has no effect on the impression the article
creates by its very existence.

In the Forbes account of this same study
([http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2012/10/10/chocolate...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/larryhusten/2012/10/10/chocolate-
and-nobel-prizes-linked-in-study/)), the first line of the article -- "You
don’t have to be a genius to like chocolate, but geniuses are more likely to
eat lots of chocolate" -- is not at all supported by the study itself, which
measures the chocolate-eating behavior of _nations_ , not _individuals_.

This is another example of irresponsible, sensationalist science journalism.
The irony is that the study's presumably scientifically trained author (Franz
Messerli of Columbia University), seems dead serious.

~~~
JumpCrisscross
To be fair the study [1], while tongue-in-cheek, is supported by research of
the impact of flavonoids in chocolate on cognitive function [2].

[1] <http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMon1211064\>

[2] <http://jn.nutrition.org/content/139/1/120.long>

~~~
lutusp
> To be fair the study [1], while tongue-in-cheek

The article has this flavor (oh, God, no pun intended) but I think the
originating author may be serious.

------
mdonahoe
The research was probably funded by Big Chocolate.

