Okay, I know I should be smarter than this, but is this a genuine article?
http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/t/m/tmp201/newsarticle2.jpg
Oh, great. Mrs. Bernse wants to gain wait, not lose it. Do you have a link to an article that says the opposite by chance? 
My .02 - It’s bogus. If it were true, with all the weight loss crap going around, everyone would know about it.
Oh, great. Mrs. Bernse wants to gain weight, not lose it. Do you have a link to an article that says the opposite by chance?
My .02 - It’s bogus. If it were true, with all the weight loss crap going around, everyone would know about it.
When I caught my spelling error my post didn’t show on refresh… although, of course it does now.
Gah!
My guess is that the numbers are fundamentelly correct but misconstrued by the media or the researchers(it seems to happen often). I suspect the statistics have been manipulated…those that swallowed gained 1 pound ; those that didn’t gained 2 pounds. Not really a significant statistical difference. But it makes good copy.
Bogus or not, I’m printing that out and carrying it around in my wallet to show prospective SO’s.
I found pretty much nothing on the “net” about Ingrid Fleischer. Unless something else comes up, I’m thinking its bogus.
Uh, I would say it’s fake. I don’t think newspapers often print stuff like “An unnamed female said. . .she would have ‘eaten him three meals a day.’”
Also, “an ingredient which targets calories. . .” Huh? Isn’t a calorie a unit of measure? I heard you can grow taller by using this product that targets your inches, too.
A web search also finds only matches of dubious reliability.
So, it might be fun to try to convince your SO, but be prepared to sleep underneath the backyard picnic table if she has any critical thinking skills whatsoever.
Not to mention the article isn’t in the Boston Globe archives (since 1979). And a web search of the author, Gina Gunn, turns up no journalist by that name.
Peace.
You can also lose weight by sending me all the cash in your wallet.
What good is that going to do? The only ones who will believe it are those who can’t read it.
haven’t checked it (because it would cost me $3), but a search of Lexis Nexis on the name Ingrid Fleischer seems to indicate an article in the May 1, 2002 edition of Playboy (page 47.) Somebody will have to check on what the Playboy article reports, and whether it refers to this “study.”
The name Gina Gunn, however, fails to turn up anything.
:rolleyes:
Um, people, it’s a joke. A gag. See, you pull it out of your pocket and say, “See, honey? It will help you lose weight!” Hahahahaha!
(A real newspaper article would not, as was already pointed out, say “an unnamed female.” It would also not contain the numerous grammatical errors.)
My roommate was throwing out a large stack of Playboys the other day, and asked if I wanted any. I checked, and there was a copy of the May 2002 issue.
I opened it up and began flipping to page 47. Several hours later when I arrived there, I found that page 47 only contained “The Playboy Advisor” (a section answering letters that readers send in). There was nothing about any Ingrid Fleischer.
In the name of the Straight Dope, I will continue to scan every page of every issue until the answer is found.
Well, that is the section Lexis Nexis cited. Could always just be a photo credit or byline or something like that. But, yeah, I’m assuming this is meant to be a joke. But in the name of truth, I think you should continue your research with the rest of 2002.
Boy, do I feel stupid.
I read everything on page 47 but didn’t bother turning the page to 48. :smack: Guess I didn’t want to spend too much time on those parts of the magazine with those … er, what do you call 'em? “words”?
Anyway, on page 48:
A couple things are clear from this:
- It’s obviously talking about the same thing as the OP. Word for word similarity.
- Playboy agrees with the general concensus here: It’s almost certainly made up, and the reason it was made up is pretty clear.
- People from Duluth, myself including, need to get out more.