The most overused word in the bansturbators lexicon

And that word is ‘could’ it’s frequently used in odd statistics to try and justify something being done which cannot be proven to be true under any circumstances.


25,000 lives could be saved if we cut salt
REDUCING the amount of salt we eat could save 25,000 lives a year, health experts said last night.
Deaths from heart disease and strokes would dramatically fall if shoppers checked the ingredients of everyday foods like bread and cereals.
Doctors blame the high levels of salt-laden processed foods we eat for pushing up blood pressure levels, raising the risk of heart disease.
They say most Britons have no idea how much salt they consume, or what the guideline amounts are.

These are pretty much the same group of people who came up with the alcohol unit recommendation, by plucking figures out of thin air remember?

Salt is necessary, the amount of salt in our blood equals that of seawater and this is no coincidence as evolution should you believe it infers that we descended from marine life, it’s pretty much the same for all mammals, too much, you might die eventually, too little and you die quicker. Reducing your salt intake to zero as some idiots will try will actually kill you. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (May 4, 2011), reported that among 3,681 study subjects followed for as long as 23 years, the cardiovascular death rate was more than 50 percent higher among those on who consumed less salt. So using an actual scientific test for comparison it appears that doctors and the government in the UK are recommending a course of action that will actually kill us quicker than hypertension which might (just might) be exacerbated by salt but which salt doesn’t actually cause. (Stress and misery are far more likely along with a genetic tendency to hypertension)

I have high blood pressure, my doctor and her nurse continually check it and recommend ever higher doses of something which might bring it down (no luck yet) Yet I feel perfectly healthy if a little old these days and when checking my diet they found I’m actually eating far healthier than they apparently do.

So junk science is being used with the word ‘could’ to try and justify ever greater intrusions into our lives by legislation which the cost of which will be passed onto us.

Perhaps when reading the word ‘could’ we should substitute ‘probably will not’ instead…

9 comments for “The most overused word in the bansturbators lexicon

  1. Stonyground
    February 12, 2013 at 7:15 pm

    This notion of ‘lives being saved’ that these people use implies that if we only ate the right kinds of food, gave up even moderate drinking, and smoking obviously, and took the recommended amount of excercise, then we would become immortal.

    The truth is that we all die eventually, and I, for one, am not prepared to give up good food and the occasional drink to buy myself a few extra years at the shitty end of my life. It really angers me that there are people who refuse to recognise my right to make that decision for myself. Not only that, the government picks my pocket in order to pay these people to stay on my case about it.

    • February 12, 2013 at 7:37 pm

      “I, for one, am not prepared to give up good food and the occasional drink to buy myself a few extra years at the shitty end of my life.”

      I agree – and the shitty end of life can be exactly that. Take a walk round a care home and sniff the air. If salt helps me avoid that, then bring on more salt.

  2. Stephen Brown
    February 12, 2013 at 9:48 pm

    I believe that the only function of the vinegar which I sprinkle over my chips is to provide a surface to which the blizzard of salt I next dredge over them actually adheres. I love salt; I put large quantities of it on almost every food item I consume. Tomatoes, radishes, celery and a multitude of other foodstuffs would be inedible to me without salt. I also like mustard (English, not American or French mess), home-made horseradish sauce (clears the sinuses in one go) and Japanese wasabe. It’s the it’s the gustatory and olfactory sensations which make such substances attractive to the palate.
    I will not bend to the bansturbator’s demands that my nutritional intake be nought but bland pablum. I like my fillet steak (cut from a recognisably bovine carcass)to flinch when I stick my fork into it and for it to wince when I spread a goodly dollop of horseradish on it before I consume the still-bleeding flesh!

  3. Twenty_Rothmans
    February 12, 2013 at 10:06 pm

    There’s ‘must’, too, as in ‘something must be done to’ – and ‘warn’ – if you take the BBC RSS feed you’ll be warned about 100 times per day.

    I am with AK and Stonyground, except that I sincerely hope that people such as Bruce Neal and Rob Moodie live forever – literally.

    Has it struck anybody else that this wowserism is a form of infantalism? I know that my life is finite, and no matter how many mung beans someone like Sally Casswell might like to have forced down my throat, the body and mind continue to degrade (and Professor Casswell’s face is testament to that).

    The modest riches I accumulated during my halcyon years will degrade too, when my career reaches its use-by date. Alas, I am not paid to splunk out ‘public health policy’. I failed the Gauleiter exam so I make widgets instead. Chinamen are very good at making widgets. So we get Chinese widgets and home-grown lunatics to tell us how to live – and if we may die.

    Their ‘skills’ such as they are, are superfluous.They know that. That’s why ‘thousands could die’ if they – not Rambo, not St George, not Siegfried – did not come to the rescue. Their ‘could die’ report is their money shot.

    These people, who detest the people who serve them in shops (since, after all, they are burger-scoffing, binge-drinking smokers who did not get a 1:1 in Sociology), are not fit to lick the mud from that cashier’s JJB’s-purchased Nikes. I choose to go to a supermarket. I don’t choose to pay somebody with a mouth like a cat’s bum to tell me what I may do.

    And, when they wake up every morning in their nursing home, squelching in their own filth, expecting to be cleaned up by a nursing aide who’s very poorly paid, they’d best mind their manners and thank the Lord for another joyous day of precious life. That’s one person who could have died, and wants to die, but can’t.

    I hope that someone won’t let them.

  4. February 13, 2013 at 4:12 am

    But what’s the point of living longer, if all you’ve got to look forward to in your last days is the notorious ‘Liverpool care pathway’?

  5. February 13, 2013 at 9:25 am

    Allegedly I have a bit too much cholesterol in what is left of my blood, the Doc reckons that if I give up the fags and salt and any other thing I enjoy eating or drinking I could live an extra ten years, to which I replied “I don’t want to live an extra ten years, I am knackered enough now, why should I want to exist in misery with a decomposing body when I can go out with a smile on my face?”

    There was no answer given…

  6. Andrew Duffin
    February 13, 2013 at 9:56 am

    And windmills “could” generate enough power to supply the whole of Scotland.

    According to Salmond.

  7. Matt
    February 13, 2013 at 1:50 pm

    Whether or not salt causes long-term effects on blood pressure (personally I don’t believe it does), how does anybody know what “normal” blood pressure is anyway? Doctors these days seem very keen to tell people their blood pressure is “high”, but compared to what? Given that we don’t all enter into this world accompanied by a data sheet and maintencance manual, presumably the figures the doctors use come from an average of measurements of a sample of people – whose size would be negligible compared to global, or even national, population.

    It’s likely that in selecting the sample they chose people they deemed to be “healthy” (there’s no point trying to deduce a “healthy” average from a sample containing sick people). However if advertised as such this may result in selection bias by discouraging certain people from applying. It is also likely that they rejected the outlying values in the results, deeming them to be measurement errors or “abnormal” individuals. It could just be that certain individuals naturally have significantly higher blood pressure than average, yet are perfectly healthy, but by discounting these from the results the accepted “normal” range band is made narrower.

    And it must be remembered that if they are comparing to an “average” value then roughly half of the population will be over that level automatically. Add to this the fact that many people are somewhat nervous when undergoing medical examinations – leading to temporarily elevated pulse and blood pressure – and it puts serious doubt on the meaningfulness of any doctor’s blood pressure measurement.

    As an engineer I can’t see how taking a single one-off measurement of a parameter which can fluctuate enormously even over the space of minutes (and is affected significantly by taking the measurement) can tell you anything at all meaningful. Perhaps doctors know better but I have my doubts.

Comments are closed.