Skip to main content

Conductors of beer goggle study may have been drunk themselves

As anyone who knows me could confidently state, I'm a major proponent of research, studies, and just science in general. Yes, I'm one of those crazy ones that likes to learn through observing, testing, and reading, as opposed to through ancient books, psychics, and conspiracy theories. In saying all of this, however, there are times when I'll read about a study that will have me shaking my head, rolling my eyes in a manner which would make Linda Blair impressed, and wondering aloud, "Why in the hell was this really necessary?"

Such a study was just released by some Bristol University researchers and published in the most recent edition of the journal Alcohol and Alcoholism. What did this "study" showcase? Oh, just the following, as reported by David Freeman of The Huffington Post:

- "For the study, researchers at Bristol University took three headshots each of heterosexual students ranging in age from 18 to 30 years: one showing the student sober, another showing the student after consuming one drink, and a third after the student had had more to drink (two drinks)."

- "Then a group of 40 heterosexual students were asked to rate the attractiveness of the students in the photos. The photos were presented in pairs: first, the student sober and after one drink and then the student sober and after consuming more than one drink."

- "...The students were rated more attractive when they had consumed one drink than when they were sober or more intoxicated."

Like with most drugs, alcohol affects people differently and there are way too many unknowns about this study to take it seriously. First off, was the supposed level of physical attractiveness similar for each of the study's participants? Did they all have similar frames (BMI's)? Were they all equally full from a recent meal? Were they all equally hydrated? Did they all have a similar history of drinking alcohol and have an equal tolerance level due to that? Were any of them taking medications which could have affected them more significantly after consuming alcohol? Like I said, there are way too many unknowns about this study to take it seriously, and at the end of the day, did we really need this study to begin with?

We don't need a lazily conducted study to announce this earth-shattering headline: "Drunk people tend to be less attractive on the eyes than those whom are completely sober or haven't consumed enough alcohol to be drunk."

Before we waste any more money on such pointless studies, allow me to provide some more earth-shattering headlines:

- James Earl Jones with a smokers cough is less sexy than James Earl Jones without a smokers cough.

- Spelling bee champions don't get laid as often as high school quarterbacks.

- Pot smokers and those whom are sleep-deprived tend to laugh at everything and nothing far more often than anyone else.

- Sex with another person leads to more pregnancies than sex with a blow-up doll.

- Wearing goggles in a bar will lead others to believe the person is less attractive regardless of how much alcohol they've consumed.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/04/alcohol-atractive-beer-googles_n_6801204.html

http://www.livescience.com/50009-alcohol-drinks-attractive.html

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"