First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Spending too much time on Computer cause Death
148 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / the sky
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
I'm looking forward to death. =)
55520 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / 風の山
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
lol, thats mainly due to the fact that it decreases the amount of excercise, the strain on your body being in a position for hours, and the lack/excess of food consumption.

by that record since i sit in from of the computer 6-10 hours a day. and through laws of ratio. my life span should be 40-65 percent shorter than my average family lifespan. so that should mean that i should either be dead now or within the next 10 years.

which i highly doubt. i get me excercises in. i eat healthy or healthy enough.

so obvious alot of factors play in and its not direct as you'd think

that concludes my observation
41641 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 3/2/12 , edited 3/2/12
Did you know that I don't care?

Everything can cause death nowadays.

Including my antidepressant. Which I have to take 2 times a day.

So, point taken, everything is a safety hazard in the eyes of the FDA, homeland security, etc. But do I give a damn? Nahhh.
2479 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / CT
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
Here's a fun fact for you:

72.34% of all Statistical information you are exposed to through any form of media, is made up on the spot.

71569 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Other
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
"Sitting in front of the computer for 6 hours a day increases your risk of death by 40%"

Increases risk of death from what? Having a marble shot into your head from 3000 meters away by a radioactive scorpion?
That sort of claim with a statistic is the sort of thing main stream/popular media use to fool people into believing some claim that will reduce that risk.

It's amusing that people pick up on the statistics part but not the lack of specificity.
19188 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
Interesting, but I work-out, eat-right, stay a few hours in the computer.
24577 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F / Your Cookie Jar
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
I should spend more time on the computer then :3
Posted 3/2/12
Source?
Posted 3/2/12

KiteCross wrote:

Eh Aids can do better than that and yet despite this statistic there is still over population.


Posted 3/2/12 , edited 3/2/12

Coffeebot wrote:

"Sitting in front of the computer for 6 hours a day increases your risk of death by 40%"

Increases risk of death from what? Having a marble shot into your head from 3000 meters away by a radioactive scorpion?
That sort of claim with a statistic is the sort of thing main stream/popular media use to fool people into believing some claim that will reduce that risk.

It's amusing that people pick up on the statistics part but not the lack of specificity.


I'm glad someone picked up on that :)

The exact same sort of thing happens when you see reporting on annual survival rates among Americans who take a flu shot.

That is, statistically, Americans who get a flu shot tend to have something like a 30% increased survival rate over the course of the year...and again to clarify (because it is pretty freaking unclear) -- that's 30% lower mortality from ALL causes, not just flu.

Obviously it's not that the flu shot is the secret to immortality...but I would guess that rather, it's because people who take a flu shot tend to take care of themselves in other ways.

Similarly, there was a recent study, which intimated that people who take certain vitamins actually had a greatly INCREASED chance of mortality over the average population. Of course, some moron magazines and news programs started blabbering about vitamins causing death.

The various errors and misinterpretations to come out of that study are so numerous that it would be insane for me to even attempt to tackle them here -- short version for anyone reading who might be now worried about vitamins...don't worry, the study was mentioned only to point out the insanity present in the popular interpretation of statistical studies.

These and other examples are evidence of how statistics are very easily manipulated, and that nobody should accept an interpretation of something because of one study, or even because of the results of multiple studies, simply because it is so easy to present statistics in a grossly manipulative fashion.
Posted 3/2/12
That's only if you spend a really large amount of time on the internet without breaks everyday.
49061 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 3/2/12
Fact: At my school, we have two programming professors (one is really engineering and moonlights as programming) and they're each well above 60 and there is no indication that they're going anywhere anytime soon. One was a student when a computer was a whole room and he would fix the hanging chads on the punch cards that his professors submitted. The other was there when the people that were creating the IEEE standard were creating it. I don't mean live alive at the time, I mean she was literally at the meetings with them. The point is, as programmers, and professors, they spend well above 12 hours a day at computers whether it be teaching or working. As such, I declare this statistic complete and total BS. If this were true most of us programmers would just die well in our 30s or 40s based on how much computer work we do.
Posted 3/2/12
I am going to die tomorrow.
Posted 3/2/12

D01BCDN3 wrote:

I am going to die tomorrow.


Because Trolls is the only person with a shortest life span (like a dragonfly)
Posted 3/2/12

Zeta986 wrote:


D01BCDN3 wrote:

I am going to die tomorrow.


Because Trolls is the only person with a shortest life span (like a dragonfly)


It takes one to know to know one's life span, doesn't it?
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.