Gut Rumbles

September 29, 2005

more pure shit

Now, being left-handed is a health risk.

What will "science" come up with next?



Posted by: Gen on September 29, 2005 06:53 PM

this is what I call a type 1 error study. If you look at enough characterisitics, one of them will be significant (that's a type 1 error).

In this case they looked at a bunch of women and what correlated best with cancer was left-handedness, which you can either interpret as bad for lefty chicks or that breast cancer is completely unpredictable unless you have a family history or genetic predisposition. Of course, the MSM runs with the doomsday interpretation.

Posted by: caltechgirl on September 29, 2005 07:02 PM

I found out the hard way that boxing a lefty is hazarous to your health if you happen to lead with your left eye-and I did.

Posted by: GUYK on September 29, 2005 08:26 PM

Oddly enough, left-handedness runs in some families too. Genetic, ya think?

Posted by: Indigo on September 29, 2005 11:50 PM

Well, I'm left-handed, was diagnosed with breast cancer ( in the left breast, too -- is THAT significant??) at 44 (pre-menopausal), no genetic markers, family history , none of the other physical allegedly predisposing factors -- my personal interpretation? Shit happens -- deal with it.

Posted by: Marianne in CA on September 30, 2005 03:48 AM

This isn't really new.
Apparently left handers are heir to a bunch of things at a higher rate than the right handed population for reasons which no one really understands. There may well be a hormonal component to it but at this point no one can say.
As to running in families; of my Dad's parents 7 G'kids 4 are left handed versus something like 10% of the general population.


Posted by: ibm on September 30, 2005 03:13 PM
Post a comment

*Note: If you are commenting on an older entry, your
comment will not appear until it has been approved.
Do not resubmit it.