2bees Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 It’s the way it’s presented. You could say “Some scientific studies suggest that drinking whiskey lowers the risk of having a heart attack, What effect do you think everyone drinking a bottle of whiskey for breakfast would have on the number of people not having heart attacks” which is absolutely ludicrous but is as stupid as the brain damage and sickness absences comments on the anti-cannabis survey. The worst thing is, Government are paying for this study and no doubt an analysis of the results.Ridiculous! 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 2 hours ago, 2bees said: It’s the way it’s presented. You could say “Some scientific studies suggest that drinking whiskey lowers the risk of having a heart attack, What effect do you think everyone drinking a bottle of whiskey for breakfast would have on the number of people not having heart attacks” which is absolutely ludicrous but is as stupid as the brain damage and sickness absences comments on the anti-cannabis survey. The worst thing is, Government are paying for this study and no doubt an analysis of the results.Ridiculous! The other thing to bear in mind is that IOM government have a history of commissioning a very expensive study/report then totally ignoring it 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 29 minutes ago, Passing Time said: The other thing to bear in mind is that IOM government have a history of commissioning a very expensive study/report then totally ignoring it They won't ignore this one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 5 minutes ago, Roxanne said: They won't ignore this one. Only if the results go their way... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Phantom Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 26 minutes ago, Passing Time said: Only if the results go their way... Which they've tried their best to avoid by deliberately loading the questions. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 34 minutes ago, Passing Time said: Only if the results go their way... Well, yes, that was my point, you doofus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Jeanie Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 I'm in my late 40's and I received the survey.......the wording and structure of the survey is messy, at best. The first glaringly confusing aspect was at the very beginnig, with a set of questions you were to grade from 1 to 10...... wait for it....... 10 being the least and 1 being the most...... I kid you not. There are more awful examples of wording, similar to what 2bees has pointed out, however I was glad to see quite a few sections where one could put forth their hopes for decriminalisation or legalisation without making yourself sound like you are wishing for the world to end at the same time. Another big confusion about this was the fact that there was no unique code to enter to take the survey.....meaning all you need is the web address to complete the survey. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 6 minutes ago, Little Jeanie said: 10 being the least and 1 being the most...... That is quite astounding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlebushy Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 10 out of 10 for being the most least most idiotic survey. Or is it 1 out of 10. I'm confused now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
genericUserName Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 (edited) 21 hours ago, Zarley said: But people who are in their 50s, 60s and 70s today were the youth back in the 1960s and 70s People in their 50s today were young back in the 80s and 90s. Ex Conservative PM David Cameron, who got into trouble for using cannabis in the 80s, is 56. On the IOM he would have been in much deeper trouble. Liam Gallagher is 50. Noel is 55. I'm not a big fan of their music but they would probably be fairly representative of the culture of that time. I have seen the survey. Far too many of the questions seemed either very slanted - or else asked questions to which many informed people will either have no particular opinion (or will disagree with the premise). The survey also seems to ask leading questions - directing respondents in a way which is non-neutral. It is also way too long and boring. Well done to anyone who bothered to get to the end. Edited April 5, 2023 by genericUserName Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Mexico Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 2 hours ago, Little Jeanie said: I'm in my late 40's and I received the survey.......the wording and structure of the survey is messy, at best. The first glaringly confusing aspect was at the very beginnig, with a set of questions you were to grade from 1 to 10...... wait for it....... 10 being the least and 1 being the most...... I kid you not. There are more awful examples of wording, similar to what 2bees has pointed out, however I was glad to see quite a few sections where one could put forth their hopes for decriminalisation or legalisation without making yourself sound like you are wishing for the world to end at the same time. Another big confusion about this was the fact that there was no unique code to enter to take the survey.....meaning all you need is the web address to complete the survey. Even by the standards of a deliberately biased survey (and we've seen enough of those from IOMG) what struck me about this was how amateurish this was. Even the stuff we got from the local health students realised that you need to keep stuff simple, especially at the start. And yet this is allegedly being done by a University. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roxanne Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 15 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said: Even by the standards of a deliberately biased survey (and we've seen enough of those from IOMG) what struck me about this was how amateurish this was. Even the stuff we got from the local health students realised that you need to keep stuff simple, especially at the start. And yet this is allegedly being done by a University. Agreed. I was reading the questions as if I was reading an assignment and thinking, 'no, that's not right, that's confusing, that's back to front'... I missed my red pen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Passing Time Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 6 hours ago, Roxanne said: Well, yes, that was my point, you doofus. Well then say what you mean don't mean what you say...dingus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 4 hours ago, genericUserName said: Liam Gallagher is 50. Noel is 55. I'm not a big fan of their music but they would probably be fairly representative of the culture of that time. These guys take/took Class A drugs because they could, and can, afford to. They are millionaires with far too much time and money on their hands and spend their time how they want, singing songs and stuff. They are representative of hardly anyone. But I would suggest that because they are successful and iconic Rock 'n' Roll stars - semi-talented or otherwise - that people who envy their lifestyles can so easily emulate them by taking lots of drugs, after picking up a guitar and learning to twang 'Smoke On The Water' or whatever the equivalent would be these days. They can easily give up the guitar and pursuit of rock 'n' roll stardom but not so easily giving up the drugs bit. Drugs are fine because Noel and Liam take them no probs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barlow Posted April 5, 2023 Share Posted April 5, 2023 10 hours ago, 2bees said: It’s the way it’s presented. You could say “Some scientific studies suggest that drinking whiskey lowers the risk of having a heart attack, What effect do you think everyone drinking a bottle of whiskey for breakfast would have on the number of people not having heart attacks” which is absolutely ludicrous but is as stupid as the brain damage and sickness absences comments on the anti-cannabis survey. During Covid I discovered that to gargle with neat whiskey, literally a spoonful, kept any colds, sore throats, coughs and ailments away. Actually, it was a fucking ace cure/prevention technique, just a spoonful every few days or so. There is a science behind this that whiskey can be a super medicine, but if it was publiziced by the Government half the country would be even more pissed than they were during lockdowns and would continue to be so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.