Slashdot Mirror


Parasite Correlated With World Cup Success

mahiskali writes "A parasite commonly found in cats, Toxoplasma gondii, has an unnerving relation to World Cup victories by country. (This parasite was discussed here twice in 2006.) Toxo can be found in almost every type of mammal, from rats to humans. The overall goal of the parasite is to end up in a feline stomach, which is the only place it can reproduce. In other mammals, humans for example, the parasite heads for the brain. It is estimated that nearly 1/3 of the human population has a latent Toxo infection, with individual countries having infection rates varying from 6% (Korea) to 92% (Ghana). Countries with greater incidence of this parasitic infection in their populations tend to win more World Cups than those without. The article, written by a Stanford University neuroscientist, goes on to try out various rationales for such a correlation, ranging from increased testosterone to increased dissent of authority — all symptoms of a Toxo infection. Now we just need to find a parasite that causes an inability to referee properly, and we'll have this whole World Cup business all sorted out."

366 comments

  1. Good News is... by ChrisK87 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fortunately here in the States we don't have to worry about such dangerous things as world cup victories.

    1. Re:Good News is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nor does the bulk of Asia.

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited.

      The US is top tier in FIFA rankings compared to China, India, Russia, the Islamic World. I'm also amused that they put Israel in with UEFA and not in AFC because the Islamic nations won't play them. Put Israel in AFC and if they won't play then they forfeit.

    2. Re:Good News is... by socz · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited.

      Now THAT makes sense! That's why we have the world series of baseball with only 2 countries playing!

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    3. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But now that we know what will win a victory....
      This is the land of doping for sports. I shouldn't be the slightest startled to find an expose' of the U.S.A. team eating kitty poo hor d'oerves for that extra shot of "Toxo".

    4. Re:Good News is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If anything the UEFA cup should be called the World Cup because players from all over the world are in the European Leagues.

      I know they call it the World Series because the best players in the world come to the MLB and all that, it's a dumb name for a series.

      How many countries have a serious interest in Baseball? US, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, RoK and Japan, that's pretty much it.

      The MLB series should be called the Commissioner's Series.

    5. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Except the point is that the much-ballyhooed-by-TEH-WORLD(tm) "World Cup" is just as inaccurate as the evil, evil, evil, rude, evil, evil, backwards, evil, not-at-all-like-Europe, evil, evil, hated, evil, evil, GAAAARGH WHY DO THEY NOT JUST DIE LIKE I HATE THEM TO, evil, evil, and just not nice United States's "World Series" (which is from the evil United States, meaning it is evil).

      Sounds a bit like the World Series is a bit more diverse than the World Cup, from your definition...

    6. Re:Good News is... by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 1

      How many countries have a serious interest in Baseball? Canada.

      HA

      That's stretching it. Sure we got a team but nobody roots for them, not even Canadians.

    7. Re:Good News is... by Nethead · · Score: 1

      That's OK, we'll gladly let you have the Curling World Series.

      I was in St. Louis during the Olympics and hung out at a Irish dive bar (JP's) that was TOTALLY into the matches... mostly trying to figure out the rules.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    8. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 5, Informative

      Except the point is that the much-ballyhooed-by-TEH-WORLD(tm) "World Cup" is just as inaccurate as the evil, evil, evil, rude, evil, evil, backwards, evil, not-at-all-like-Europe, evil, evil, hated, evil, evil, GAAAARGH WHY DO THEY NOT JUST DIE LIKE I HATE THEM TO, evil, evil, and just not nice United States's "World Series" (which is from the evil United States, meaning it is evil).

      Except that its not.

      The FIFA World Cup process includes teams from pretty much the whole world (there are few nations that don't aren't FIFA members, but not many.) Sure, most teams don't last past the
      the qualifiers, but that doesn't mean they aren't part of the process.

      OTOH, the MLB "World" Series, even including the MLB regular season as a "qualifying" process, includes teams from two countries.

      So, no, the two aren't even approximately equal.

    9. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 4, Informative

      The US is top tier in FIFA rankings compared to China, India, Russia, the Islamic World.

      Russia (#11) is ranked higher than the US (#14)

      "the Islamic World" doesn't have a team, but one predominantly-Islamic country (Egypt) is ranked above the US (Egypt; #12).

      OF course, FIFA rankings and FIFA World Cup qualifications aren't all that tightly linked; many of the countries (including Asian countries) that qualify for the WC do so over higher-ranked countries (North Korea, ranked #105, being a prime example this year.)

    10. Re:Good News is... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Still less boring than baseball.

    11. Re:Good News is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I'm only interested in a couple sports (American Football, Soccer, Hockey) and almost none of the Winter Olympics, but I love Curling, it's addictive to watch and try and figure out.

    12. Re:Good News is... by ColaMan · · Score: 1

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited.

      So....

      Group from eastern hemisphere + group from western hemisphere + smattering of other groups from northern / southern hemispheres != world?

      --

      You are in a twisty maze of processor lines, all alike.
      There is a lot of hype here.
    13. Re:Good News is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But the process is very heavily weighted for European countries.

      All of Asia - four slots representing 3.88 billion people.

      Africa - six slots (including 1 for the host)representing 1 billion people

      Central and North America, Caribbean - 3 slots for .528 billion people

      South America - 5 slots for .385 billion people

      Europe - 13 slots for .731 billion people.

      And one slot up for grabs between Asia and Oceania.

      Asia should have 7 slots, Europe, 8, South America 4, Africa, 7, North/Central America 4 with the last spot interchangeable with South America like how Oceania and Asia's is now and Oceania 1. Thats 31 plus 1 for the host country.

    14. Re:Good News is... by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it count for anything that it's not really a popular sport in China, India, or the US(not top 5 at least) which comprise almost 50% of the worlds population?

      Not saying we need to get into a pissing match or anything, but I think it's always best to take "World" or "Universe" or whatever with more than a grain of salt whenever it's used.

    15. Re:Good News is... by unix1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited.

      "Invited?" Every World Cup tournament is preceded by World Cup qualifying matches in which every country meeting FIFA criteria (which is pretty much every country) participates. That's why it's called the World Cup.

    16. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Almost %50 of the population... Therefore most of the world does play football, even though you are wrong with your claim. Football has a massive following in China, being one of the most popular sports, in India only being ranked second to cricket (which is kind of a given). In the US it is the most popular recreational sport for both male & female competitors.

      Your claims fall flat on their face when tested to any degree.

      The World Cup is an international event, and starts again pretty much as soon as the cup is won. Just because you only follow the World Cup when your team is in the group stages doesn't mean it isn't going on for 4 years.

      You need to check your facts before you make huge claims on slashdot, if not, we will.

    17. Re:Good News is... by iserlohn · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know which world you're in but football is big in China and less so but catching on in India (behind Cricket of course). There really is just no comparison with the MLB.

    18. Re:Good News is... by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Funny

      ...That's why we have the world series of baseball with only 2 countries playing!

      You know, I've always been surprised by how often a woman from Earth wins the Miss Universe contest. You think it's rigged?

      --
      http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    19. Re:Good News is... by moranar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ... And you'd be skewing the results another way. Part of the thing is watching good teams play. When thinking about an exciting world cup match, "North Korea vs Uzbekistan" does not come to mind. Good teams mostly come from Europe, or South America. Granted, the level of play in the last few world cups has been really shoddy, but still, using the 'let's assign slots using only population metrics' is completely absurd.

      --
      "I think it would be a good idea!"
      Gandhi, about Internet Security
    20. Re:Good News is... by corbettw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I thought the divisions were based on nations, not populations. Or are you suggesting China should get three teams?

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    21. Re:Good News is... by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      Well, ~50%. We all know the rest are lizard people from another planet.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    22. Re:Good News is... by shoehornjob · · Score: 1

      Well it's not like a woman from Mars could win. They're so ugly. Ah but those Venusian women...it's amazing that they haven't won yet. Yeah it's rigged.

      --
      "We are just a war away from Amerikastan. When god vs god the undoing of man." Dave Mustaine
    23. Re:Good News is... by dakameleon · · Score: 1

      Oceania's population according to Wikipedia is 0.038 billion, and if you take out Australia which qualifies through Asia you've got 0.017 billion. How does that justify a guaranteed slot in any way? (Note: until this year, Oceania had shared the 5th South American slot, and got soundly trumped on a regular basis).

      I'd suspect this bias is more to represent countries than populations - UEFA had 53 teams/countries attempting to qualify; Africa had 52 + the host slot, Central/North America had 35, South America had 10, and Asia 43. Oceania's 10 contenders are mostly made up of the tiny island nations of the pacific and frankly aren't very good, so a guaranteed slot would pretty much be handing the slot to New Zealand every 4 years.

      That's a little more valid reason for the bias, though certainly Asia deserves more than 4 and Central-North America more than 3.

      --
      Man who leaps off cliff jumps to conclusion.
    24. Re:Good News is... by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      We got a team? I thought the Expos disbanded years ago!

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    25. Re:Good News is... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>I know they call it the World Series because the best players in the world come to the MLB and all that, it's a dumb name for a series.

      Actually the original name was "The World" Series which was the name of the newspaper that sponsored it. It's similar to how NASCAR had the Winston Cup and the Busch Cup. The difference is that NASCAR renamed their trophies when the sponsor changed, whereas "The World" Series never got changed..... and now if causes confusion because few remember that it was named after a paper.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    26. Re:Good News is... by commodore64_love · · Score: 0

      >>>Central and North America, Caribbean - 3 slots for .528 billion people
      >>>Europe - 13 slots for .731 billion people.

      This could be balanced if we did one of two things: Treat the European Union as 1 slot the same way we treat the American Union as 1 slot. -or- 25 slots for the EU states and 50 slots for the US states.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    27. Re:Good News is... by fractoid · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Seriously, though, I researched toxoplasmosis a while ago (new kitten plus pregnant wife equals a million people saying OMG KEEP BABBY AWAY FROM KITTAH) and it's a very interesting disease.
      From wikipedia:

      The study suggests that male carriers have shorter attention spans, a greater likelihood of breaking rules and taking risks, and are more independent, anti-social, suspicious, jealous and morose. It also suggests that these men are deemed less attractive to women. Women carriers are suggested to be more outgoing, friendly, more promiscuous, and are considered more attractive to men compared with non-infected controls. The results are shown to be true when tested on mice, though it is still inconclusive. A few scientists have suggested that, if these effects are genuine, prevalence of toxoplasmosis could be a major determinant of cultural differences.

      It makes men more macho (the study does lose major credibility, though, by suggesting that risk-taking rule-breaking antisocial men are LESS attractive to women... what planet are they from?) and it makes women friendlier and sexier. Where's the bad?

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    28. Re:Good News is... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      No. The lizard people were here first, then they went into hibernation due to an asteroid killing the ecosystem, and the apes evolved into humans

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    29. Re:Good News is... by Trogre · · Score: 1

      Unlike, say, the World Series?

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    30. Re:Good News is... by zill · · Score: 5, Informative

      Football is the #1 sport in China and FIFA is the most watched sports event in China.

    31. Re:Good News is... by Nethead · · Score: 1

      I've known a few couples that had relationships like hockey games. It always seems like I'm the one stuck waiting for them go get out of the emergency room.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    32. Re:Good News is... by nitehawk214 · · Score: 1

      How many countries have a serious interest in Baseball? Canada.

      HA

      That's stretching it. Sure we got a team but nobody roots for them, not even Canadians.

      Neither does anyone from Pittsburgh.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    33. Re:Good News is... by thetagger · · Score: 1

      FIFA has more members than the United Nations, and all of them take part in the classifying rounds. Heck, FIFA has more members than the Universal Postal Union, so there are more countries interested in playing international football than receiving international mail.

      If the World Cup can't use the word "World", there is no such thing as a world.

      That only South American and European teams have won the World Cup is a completely different issue.

    34. Re:Good News is... by BluBrick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Still less boring than baseball.

      Cricket. Now that's a dull sport! In the words of Robin Williams, "It's like baseball on Mandrax." At least baseball doesn't go for FIVE WHOLE DAYS with no result.

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    35. Re:Good News is... by wisty · · Score: 1

      Not really. There are less young players in China than in England (due in part to a lack of facilities), so the national team is fed from a small base.

      Ping-pong, gymnastics, and basketball are all popular activities.

      It might be the most watched sport, but I doubt it. Basketball would be more popular. FIFA is pretty big though.

    36. Re:Good News is... by Capsaicin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not saying we need to get into a pissing match or anything, but I think it's always best to take "World" or "Universe" or whatever with more than a grain of salt whenever it's used.

      FIFA has more national members than the UN. More than 200 teams from all around the world competed for this years world cup. Apart from the Olympics, it is difficult to imagine any sporting event more appropriately tagged as "World" than this. There is certainly no single sport which attracts anywhere near the level of support football does, even if you count out the dark areas of Earth (USA/Can, India/Pakistan, Australia/NZ).

      Why do you hate reality?

      --
      Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
    37. Re:Good News is... by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited."

      What makes you say that? Because the bulk of the entries come from Europe and South America? Or because that is where the winners come from, because they play the best football? The World Cup is open to all nations who ware willing to play by FIFA rules, meaning FIFA rules of the game and no (major) political interference with the tournament. In fact, I think FIFA would love it if more Asian countries put forth serious entries and improved their level of play. The increasingly strong representation of Africa in recent years has been welcomed by all, and fans around the world enjoyed seeing Ghana defeat the USA and battle Uruguay to a shoot-out, in a game they should have won. That is not to mention that both Japan and South Korea advanced past group play, Australia missed only missed out on goal differential, New Zealand were not beaten, and two CONCACAF representatives, USA and Mexico (not Honduras), faired okay.

      It is a World Cup, and open to all countries with a team good enough to earn a spot by winning some qualifying matches and showing a dedication to and respect for the beautiful game. Bangladesh or Cambodia should not be handed a ticket to Brazil in 2014 just so Asia will have more teams, they have to earn it by competing and succeeding. More competitive play could garner more regional teams in the final tournament. Until then, sorry.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    38. Re:Good News is... by Literaryhero · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This could be balanced if we did one of two things: Treat the European Union as 1 slot the same way we treat the American Union as 1 slot. -or- 25 slots for the EU states and 50 slots for the US states.

      Except for the fact that the 'American Union' is actually one country, and the European Union is not. Should we start splitting up the EU member nations by state/province too? Or perhaps you just made this comment because the US is a large nation. Hey, even though Canada doesn't qualify, we need to split them up, too. Russia, too big, let's start treating them as separate smaller states. China and India too. Hey, this is fun!

    39. Re:Good News is... by Literaryhero · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually the original name was "The World" Series which was the name of the newspaper that sponsored it. It's similar to how NASCAR had the Winston Cup and the Busch Cup. The difference is that NASCAR renamed their trophies when the sponsor changed, whereas "The World" Series never got changed..... and now if causes confusion because few remember that it was named after a paper.

      Except for the fact that you completely made that up.

      Here is a brief excerpt from the Wikipedia article: The series were promoted and referred to as the "The Championship of the United States", "World's Championship Series", or "World's Series" for short.

    40. Re:Good News is... by TheLink · · Score: 1
      --
    41. Re:Good News is... by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that study was more interesting than the others which merely said it made you irritable and could cause swelling or meningitis. :(

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    42. Re:Good News is... by opposabledumbs · · Score: 1

      According to this page

      http://roadsidephotos.sabr.org/baseball/name.htm

      you're wrong there. It was originally named the "Championship of the World" and this was then shortened to "World Championship Series", and again to "World Series". Your way would make much more sense, though.

    43. Re:Good News is... by Brad1138 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Every World Cup tournament is preceded by World Cup qualifying matches in which every country meeting FIFA criteria (which is pretty much every country) participates. That's why it's called the World Cup.

      You obviously know to much about soccer to be American.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    44. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but because wikipedia has controversial content and is most likely censored by the Chinese government, who gives a shit what wikipedia says about chinese sports popularity? :D

    45. Re:Good News is... by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Funny

      Antarctica got robbed!

    46. Re:Good News is... by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      There is no "American Union", or are you saying Mexico, the US and Canada should get on spot total?

    47. Re:Good News is... by ram.loss · · Score: 1

      But the thing is, this tournament is for football players, not the population in general. Furthermore, one would think that nowadays it is aimed at professional football players.

      But regardless, your analysis has not considered the additional complication of national football federations; each one has a certain number of affiliates, which may or may not reflect the total population of a nation.

    48. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are less young players in China than in England (due in part to a lack of facilities), so the national team is fed from a small base.

      You're kidding, right? Starting about 10 years ago China has gone on a massive youth recruitment programme, even children as young as 4 are in training. Give them a few decades and they'll be a force to be reckoned with. Unlike the football ghetto which the USA is condemned to.

    49. Re:Good News is... by ppanon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Heh. The rules of curling are actually pretty simple. It's mostly like bocce/petanque on ice, with bigger rocks that nobody in their right mind tries to throw. The strategies and techniques for curling however, are more complex.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
    50. Re:Good News is... by lordholm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Outside of the EU they do not longer think of the individual states that much. The problem is that Europeans, in general, fail to see their importance in the world as _Europeans_.

      Now, I wouldn't mind seeing a European team, but practicalities prevent this from happening except for maybe some exhibition game. Some states are so devolved that they field several teams, like for instance the UK (which most people outside of UK think as one country, but is actually 4 countries under one flag), where each of 4 countries in the UK have their own team.

      --
      "Civis Europaeus sum!"
    51. Re:Good News is... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      But consider that england is where football was started, and england operates the most widely watched club football league in the world...
      Many chinese like to gamble on the outcome of football rather than actually play it themselves, and a lot of those would rather watch the english premier league than local chinese leagues.

      China actually failed to qualify for the world cup finals this year, Japan, South Korea, North Korea and i believe Australia also qualify in the asian region now...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    52. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Over 205 teams participated in the 2010 World Cup.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FIFA_World_Cup_qualification

      No countries need to be invited.

      If a sport event with 205 countries participating isn't "World" cup, what is?

      If you want to complain about the inappropriate usage of the word "World" look no further than the WBC. A whopping 16 teams participated for the HUGE WORLDLY EVENT of 2009 World Baseball Classic!

    53. Re:Good News is... by Bert64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Turkey are also an islamic nation, and their national team tends to be quite good... They made it to the last 4 in 2002 for instance.

      Because of the way qualifying is done in regional groups, you usually get some low ranking teams qualifying... If qualifying was entirely based on ability you'd typically only see european and south american teams at the finals.

      North Korea did surprisingly well, they held their own against Brazil who have traditionally been one of if not the best team.. People were amazed when it got to half time and it was still 0:0, and even more amazed when north korea actually scored in the second half. Sure they lost, but this was a team ranked 105 (and weren't they ranked lower at the time?) playing against the team ranked 1. North Korea were also the first asian team to reach the quarter finals in 1966, it took until 2002 for another asian team to better their record.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    54. Re:Good News is... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Well, Great Britain has... and they have far less people than China.

    55. Re:Good News is... by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Is Great Britain a country?

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    56. Re:Good News is... by the_womble · · Score: 1

      How is the EU not a country? It has a parliament, a flag, a national anthem. It has common enforcement of criminal law (e.g. no need for extradition, just issue a warrant).

      It is a sovereign body and its laws supersede those of its constituent parts. It controls things that would be under state control in the US (e.g. seatbelt laws) as well as everything to do with commerce between constituent states.

      The UK has multiple national teams, of which at least two have qualified to play in some World Cups.

    57. Re:Good News is... by the_womble · · Score: 1

      It can only be classified as world if the US has a good chance of winning - the World Series is a good example.

    58. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many chinese ... would rather watch the english premier league than local chinese leagues.

      They're serious football lovers then?

    59. Re:Good News is... by Rhaban · · Score: 1

      But the process is very heavily weighted for European countries.

      All of Asia - four slots representing 3.88 billion people.

      Europe - 13 slots for .731 billion people.

      With 17 times more people as a pool of potential player, asian teams should have a much larger number of excellent players than european teams.

    60. Re:Good News is... by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      How is the EU not a country? It has ...

      How is Africa not an island? It's land, completely surrounded by water...

      Yes, the EU has many things in common with a nation. It is not, however, a nation, merely because it has all those commonalities.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    61. Re:Good News is... by zombie_monkey · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's if you go by population. If your aim is to include the best 32 teams in the world, you would have much _more_ teams for Europe. The way it is right now is a compromise between team strength and population.

    62. Re:Good News is... by SharpFang · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, why would you think any part of the universe other than this unfashionable backwater planet has such an impractical invention as "a woman"?

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    63. Re:Good News is... by zombie_monkey · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Indeed, that's why the European Cup, in which 16 teams qualify for the finals, is regarded as a stronger tournament than the World Cup.

    64. Re:Good News is... by deains · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is Great Britain a country?

      England, Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland are countries. The United Kingdom is a sovereign state. Great Britain is an island, which the UK claims as territory.

    65. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you hate reality?

      Because it disagrees with him.

    66. Re:Good News is... by squizzar · · Score: 1, Funny

      And you obviously know too little about English to not be American.

    67. Re:Good News is... by LizardKing · · Score: 1

      How many countries have a serious interest in Baseball? US, Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, RoK and Japan, that's pretty much it.

      And Finland for some inexplicable reason.

    68. Re:Good News is... by sourcerror · · Score: 1

      "It is a sovereign body and its laws supersede those of its constituent parts. "

      Which have to be ratified by national parliaments. Oh, and it's possible to quit the EU.

    69. Re:Good News is... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      That's why we have the world series of baseball with only 2 countries playing!

      "2 countries"? There hasn't been a Canadian team in the playoffs at all since the Blue Jays took the World Series in 1993!

    70. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited.

      Nonsense. More than 200 teams took part in the preliminaries; they just didn't all make the cut and qualified for the actual world cup.

      Put Israel in AFC and if they won't play then they forfeit.

      FIFA's goal is to make money. They do this by arranging for football matches that people will watch and (hopefully) enjoy. A match that's decided by one team not showing up and/or refusing to play isn't fun, and doesn't make money. It should, therefore, be obvious that your proposal does not actually make sense.

    71. Re:Good News is... by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

      Antarctica got robbed!

      They tried but were disqualified because the penguins tried to incubate the ball.

    72. Re:Good News is... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      I was going to say people without parasites in their brains have better things to do than play soccer.

      Maybe they should check for correlations with victories in other third-rate sports, like bullfighting and field hockey and lacrosse.

      Hey, I bet people with sickle-cell anemia are more likely to be taken captive by armed rebel insurgents than people without the disorder.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    73. Re:Good News is... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > That's why we have the world series of baseball with only 2 countries playing!

      When the World Series was organized, baseball wasn't played anywhere else. (The Japanese didn't start playing baseball until after World War II.)

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    74. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure thats worse than football where you don't actually have to touch the ball with your foot.

    75. Re:Good News is... by dintech · · Score: 1

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup

      What is this World Series you speak of?

    76. Re:Good News is... by jonadab · · Score: 1

      In England they use the word "country" for sub-national entities, the way we use the word "state" in the US. Canada uses the word "province". It's the same thing. The difference is purely one of terminology.

      They also, in England, use the word "England" for what we would call "England proper" (if we ever even had a reason to refer to it specifically as distinct from the rest of the nation, which would be fairly unusual). But that's just terminology.

      In American English, "England" (the most common term), "Britain" (somewhat common), and "The UK" (mostly used in formal contexts) are in practice treated as synonyms. Unless you're a geography buff talking about the island as a land form, "Great Britain" usually refers to the country as well. And yes, it's a country, i.e., a sovereign nation-state.

      Our use of the words "England" and "Britain" to mean the country are consistent with similar usages with regard to other countries. In Holland they use the word "Holland" to refer to something less than the whole country, as well, but as far as Americans are concerned it means exactly the same thing as "The Netherlands". Compare also "Russia", which consistently meant the USSR until the break-up. (On the extremely rare occasion when we wanted to refer to the sub-national entity, we said "Russian SSR" or something like that. Of course, since the breakup Russia has been separated from some of its former constituent states.) Except in formal diplomatic contexts, "China" means the PROC and the area controlled (de facto) by the PROC; "Taiwan" means the ROC and their (de facto) territory, including the various minor islands.

      It's a matter of convenience and shorthand. We don't have time to go around saying "The People's Republic of the Congo" all the time, so we just call it (the) "Congo". It's easier. We don't want to bother to say "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Minor Outlying Territories Under Her Royal Majesty Elizabeth II" or whatever the full complete official name of the country is, so we just say "England". It's easier. FWIW, we don't say "The United States of America" most of the time either. We generally just call it "America". It's easier.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    77. Re:Good News is... by Hodr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Since you mentioned checking facts, I think you should double check yours.

      Aparently, Soccor/Football doesn't even make the top 10 "recreational sports" in the U.S., and if you mean competative amateur sports, then Bowling is #1 and Soccer / Football still does not make the top five.

      My Source (where is yours?): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_in_the_United_States#Most_Popular_Sports_in_the_United_States

    78. Re:Good News is... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>Except for the fact that the 'American Union' is actually one country, and the European Union is not

      Yeah except now it IS just one country. 75% of the laws are written by the central EU Parliament. That's a higher percentage than the number of laws written by our own central Congress. In the last ten years while europeans were distracted, the EU politicians converted you into a United States of Europe. They even demoted you from "countries" to "member states" in their documents and websites.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    79. Re:Good News is... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>it's possible to quit the EU.

      Is it? I'd like to see one of the Member States try. Our own states thought it was possible to quit the US too, but when they tried it they were brought back under control via force of Congress. I bet the EU Parliament would respond similarly.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    80. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Small correction: Algeria and Nigeria are Muslim predominant (if not state, not sure) and Saudia Arabia participated in the 1998 world cup.

    81. Re:Good News is... by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Where's the bad?

      Getting eaten by cats.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    82. Re:Good News is... by slater.jay · · Score: 1

      Stinking Pirates.

    83. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, wait wait.

      Why does Europe get more slots than Asia?

      Here's how the breakdown should be:
      Asia - 7
      North America - 5
      Europe - 5
      Africa - 3
      Oceania - 2
      Africa - 2

    84. Re:Good News is... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      A stronger tournament without Brazil and Argentina? Sounds unlikely.

      Look up which countries actually won the World Cup, and how often. South American countries dominate the list. Even a small country like Uruguay has won it more than once.

    85. Re:Good News is... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      FIFA has more members than the Universal Postal Union, so there are more countries interested in playing international football than receiving international mail.

      So how do those countries communicate with FIFA in order to enter their team for the qualifiers? Or to get a copy of the rules, or something?

    86. Re:Good News is... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Well, all those sexy women are likely to produce stillborn babies, or babies with long term structural and neurological damage. So on the one hand, you have outgoing women, but on the other hand, you get deformed offspring.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    87. Re:Good News is... by 2obvious4u · · Score: 1

      Your wiki source list is by participation, not by spectator. By spectator those stats would be much different. I know for a fact that on a Saturday during football season in the south you'll have several million people watching SEC football. The stadiums hold around 100,000 each and I've been in them when they are filled to capacity.

    88. Re:Good News is... by fractoid · · Score: 1

      Actually no, the pregnancy risk is only if the woman is actually first infected during the pregnancy, at least as far as I understand it. If she's a carrier but was infected more than two months before the pregnancy then there should be no additional risk.

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    89. Re:Good News is... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but though they mention reflexes, in the abstract they don't mention testing for reflexes. Maybe they did in the actual study.

      IMO, "shorter attention spans, a greater likelihood of breaking rules and taking risks" can also increase the chances of traffic accidents.

      --
    90. Re:Good News is... by Friggo · · Score: 1

      Toronto Blue Jays, does pretty well so far this year.

    91. Re:Good News is... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Hmm... Curious. Does it have long term negative effects in infected adults aside from the mildly increased neurotic behavior? If not, it seems like a cat owner would be better off intentionally exposing themselves to it a year or two before having children.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    92. Re:Good News is... by Kavafy · · Score: 1

      Yeah except now it IS just one country. 75% of the laws are written by the central EU Parliament.

      (Reliable) citation needed.

    93. Re:Good News is... by Kavafy · · Score: 1

      A stronger tournament without Brazil and Argentina? Sounds unlikely.

      Look up which countries actually won the World Cup, and how often. South American countries dominate the list. Even a small country like Uruguay has won it more than once.

      No, that's nonsense, because if you look that up you'll be looking at results which stretch all the way back to 1930. A better plan would be to look up the current world Elo rankings, where you'll see that only three of the world's top 16 teams are non-European. So yes, it is entirely plausible to say that the European Cup is a harder tournament.

    94. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Because of the way qualifying is done in regional groups, you usually get some low ranking teams qualifying... If qualifying was entirely based on ability you'd typically only see european and south american teams at the finals.

      Given the 32-team format for the finals, and assuming that "ability" is defined such that "Qualifying entirely based on ability" means "the top 32-ranked teams qualify to the finals", that's not particularly true.

      Had that occurred this year, for instance, the differences in qualification from the actual cup would have been (+ = country that would qualify by rank but not in actual Cup, - = country that would not qualify by rank that is in actual Cup):

      Japan -
      Korea DPR -
      Korea Republic -
      South Africa -
      Honduras -
      New Zealand -
      Denmark -
      Slovakia -
      Croatia +
      Russia +
      Egypt +
      Greece +
      Norway +
      Ukraine +
      Israel +
      Romania +
      Turkey +

      There is a shift to Europe and the parts of West Asia bordering it (e.g., Turkey, Israel) and away from East Asia, but South American participation doesn't increase, and African participation doesn't decrease. You end up with 11/32 not from Europe or South America, instead of 14/32 with the existing Cup this year. Its a big shift away from East Asia, since that whole region would be gone, but its not much more in the way of European/South American dominance than already exists.

      (Note that since Ghana is #32, going to top 31 ranks excluding the host nation, plus the host nation regardless of rank, would have exactly the same effect this year.)

    95. Re:Good News is... by alexo · · Score: 1

      And you obviously know too little about English to not be American.

      The rules of association football were codified in England by the Football Association in 1863, and the name association football was coined to distinguish the game from the other versions of football played at the time. The word soccer is a colloquial abbreviation of association (from assoc.) and first appeared in the 1880s. An early usage found in an English 1892 periodical. The word is sometimes credited to Charles Wreford Brown, an Oxford student said to have been fond of shortened forms such as brekkers for breakfast and rugger for rugby football. (See Oxford -er) Clive Toye noted that even English people called the game "soccer" interchangably with "football" until the second half of the 20th century. "A quirk of British culture is the permanent need to familiarize names by shortening them. ... Toye [said] 'They took the third, fourth and fifth letters of Association and called it SOCcer.'"
      -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_for_association_football

      Soccer's etymology is not American but British. It comes from an abbreviation for Association Football, the official name of the sport (for those of you who have never heard the team "Association Football" before, it was named after the Football Association, which still governs English soccer, to differentiate itself from the other major type of football, Rugby Football, which was named after the Rugby School. FIFA, the world governing body of soccer, is French for the International Federation of Association Football... F-I-F-A). For obvious reasons, in the 1880s and 1890s, English newspapers couldn't use the first three letters of Association as an abbreviation in their pages, so they took the next syllable, S-O-C. With the British penchant for adding "-er" at the end of words: punter, footballer, copper, and, of course, nicknaming rugby, "rugger," the word "soccer" was soon born, over a hundred years ago, here in England, the home of soccer.
      -- http://www.usembassy.org.uk/rss/transcripts/worldcup2006a.html

    96. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      But the process is very heavily weighted for European countries.

      Actually, Europe is underrepresented and Asia (and, to a lesser extent -- one team per region -- Oceania and North/Central America) overrepresented in the 32-slots in the finals compared to the number of teams each region has in the top 32 in the FIFA rankings (this year, South America and Africa were numerically right on -- the South American teams in the final were exactly those in the top 32 in the rankings, as were the African countries except that the host country isn't in the top 32 and Egypt, which didn't make the finals, is.)

      So, given that as long as you don't use rankings directly you are going to get slight variations from qualifying the top teams (justifying the one team overrepresentation in Oceania and North/Central America), and given that a slight favor to Asia in the interest of expanding interest in the region is probably intended (justifying the greater overrepresentation of Asia), I think the distribution of slots is sensible, but in any case it certainly doesn't favor Europe.

    97. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Is Great Britain a country?

      No, Great Britain is an island, with three "national" teams in FIFA.

      The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is an internationally recognized soveriegn state (one common use of the word "country"), with, if I'm not missing any, 9 FIFA teams (four in EUFA, including the three from the island of Great Britain, and five in CONCACAF.)

    98. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Except for the fact that the 'American Union' is actually one country.

      It is one soveriegn state, but that's not necessarily the same as "one country" in the sense of a "nation" which can have a FIFA "national team". I know this, because the so-called American Union -- the United States of America -- as a soveriegn state has 4 FIFA "national" teams already, including the following "nations":

      United States of America
      Puerto Rico
      U.S. Virgin Islands
      American Samoa

      (This isn't as many as the UK, which has, I think, 9.)

    99. Re:Good News is... by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Ghana were not the host nation this year, south africa is...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    100. Re:Good News is... by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      After some considerable research...

      Apparently two people nameed Stanley actually won the Stanley Cup at some point. Who Knew?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allan_Stanley
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barney_Stanley

      Also Canada sucks at Soccer.

      I also think it is stupid now that when a team wins like 50 people get their name on the cup. It used to just be like 20-30. I am sorry the Trainer's Assistant Barber, didn't win the Stanley Cup!

    101. Re:Good News is... by DarthVain · · Score: 1

      Considering that it was likely played on lakes or ponds at some point, I would bet throwing a huge rock, may have led to it sinking, and possibly making the thrower wet and cold as well.

    102. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      Ghana were not the host nation this year, south africa is...

      Presumably, that's intended as a response to this bit:

      Note that since Ghana is #32, going to top 31 ranks excluding the host nation, plus the host nation regardless of rank, would have exactly the same effect this year.

      I would have thought, from the focus on regions in GP, that it would be clear that the meaning was that the effect on the regional makeup, where Africa is taken as one region would be the same (as compared to the current system) in a top-32 arrangement (in which Ghana would be present, as #32) as in a top-31 [of FIFA ranked teams excluding the host] plus host nation arrangment (where Ghana would not be present, but South Africa, as the host, would, despite being farther down the FIFA rankings.)

    103. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      A better plan would be to look up the current world Elo rankings, where you'll see that only three of the world's top 16 teams are non-European. So yes, it is entirely plausible to say that the European Cup is a harder tournament.

      Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, and Egypt = 5

      11 of the top 16 by Elo rankings are in Europe, 11 of the top 16 by FIFA rankings are in Europe (not the same 11), and almost all of those from Europe ranked in the top 16 by either ranking as well as all the non-Europeans ranked in the top 16 by either ranking made it into the FIFA World Cup. So I certainly don't see a really strong case to be made from the rankings (FIFA or Elo) that the European Cup provides tougher competition than the FIFA World Cup.

    104. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      That's if you go by population. If your aim is to include the best 32 teams in the world, you would have much _more_ teams for Europe.

      By FIFA rankings, you'd have three more from Europe proper (considering Russia as in Europe but Turkey as in Asia, despite the fact that a small part of Turkey is an Europe, and a large -- but poorly populated -- part of Russia is in Asia), and four more from UEFA (since Israel, which is not in Europe, is nonetheless in UEFA.)

    105. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      With 17 times more people as a pool of potential player, asian teams should have a much larger number of excellent players than european teams.

      This would be a valid conclusion if football excellence was something that was randomly distributed throughout the world population.

      That may, to say the least, be an unwarranted assumption.

    106. Re:Good News is... by Kavafy · · Score: 1

      My bad. I was looking at the averaged rankings since 1970 rather than today's rankings.

      But there is still a case for saying the European Cup is harder. Croatia, Sweden, Ukraine and Russia DNQ'd for FIFA 2010, whereas Cameroon, New Zealand and Nigeria (and of course South Africa) did.

    107. Re:Good News is... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      But there is still a case for saying the European Cup is harder.

      Perhaps, but not based on rankings, Elo or FIFA.

      Croatia, Sweden, Ukraine and Russia DNQ'd for FIFA 2010, whereas Cameroon, New Zealand and Nigeria (and of course South Africa) did.

      And teams ranked higher -- in both the Elo and FIFA rankings -- than Croatia, Sweden, Ukrain, and Russia qualified for FIFA 2010 (and the only reason the European teams you point to didn't qualify is that they didn't do well enough against lower-rated European teams.)

      So, again, I don't think looking at rankings, Elo or FIFA, supports an argument that the European Cup is stronger than the FIFA World Cup (and, of course, the format differences -- since the European Cup isn't a cup of national teams but of club teams -- mean that the rankings would be largely irrelevant to the comparison even if they would support the case if the UEFA Cup was a contest of national teams in Europe.)

    108. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. What is it with this inferiority complex some Americans seem to have in regard to the EU? In some ways the EU is better, in some ways it's worse. You can certainly draw some parallels between the EU and the US, but they really are different beasts. A closer comparison is the US under the Articles of Confederation, because while "member states" have been united under a common banner and government, they're still independent countries.

      Consider also that in the case of the US at the time of SC's secession, tensions were already high and the whole country was (for the most part) unified under a common culture and language. It's quite different in the EU where the countries or "states" are separated not only by political boundaries but language and cultural boundaries as well, leading the people of those nations to react quite differently in similar situations. As a trivial example, if you fumble with your German while traveling in Germany, the person you're talking to will likely just be annoyed and ask that you speak to them in English. By contrast, in France, if you don't first fumble around with French, you're likely to get a cold reaction or they may just pretend they don't speak any English at all.

      France and Germany pretty much run the show in the EU with the UK coming along as a "me too!" (sorta like they do with the US). Those two countries have the most to lose if either left the union, so they're not going to (and things actually could get ugly if one really did decide to do so). You're trying to tell me though that if Greece decided to be done with the EU, France is going to go militant and put them back in line? Would Germany or the UK even allow that? Let's get real here. At worst, they'd impose some kind of economic sanctions on a member state trying to leave. That sort of thing could, after all, affect the reputation of the union but certainly a lot less than devolving into civil war...

      Long story short, these kinds of political interaction are extremely complex and even my attempt to highlight some of the details barely scratches the surface. Point being, it's ridiculous to say that "well, we once forcibly took back a state that tried to secede, therefore the EU would do the same thing."

    109. Re:Good News is... by WaroDaBeast · · Score: 1

      Actually, I know the answer to my own question — I was an English major at university. I asked it because the parent poster seemed to ignore that Great Britain isn't a country. Oh well, my fellow countrymen don't either...

      --
      "The body may heal, but the mind is not always so resilient." -- Deus Ex: Human Revolution
    110. Re:Good News is... by Kavafy · · Score: 1

      And teams ranked higher -- in both the Elo and FIFA rankings -- than Croatia, Sweden, Ukrain, and Russia qualified for FIFA 2010 (and the only reason the European teams you point to didn't qualify is that they didn't do well enough against lower-rated European teams.)

      So, again, I don't think looking at rankings, Elo or FIFA, supports an argument that the European Cup is stronger than the FIFA World Cup (and, of course, the format differences -- since the European Cup isn't a cup of national teams but of club teams -- mean that the rankings would be largely irrelevant to the comparison even if they would support the case if the UEFA Cup was a contest of national teams in Europe.)

      No, I meant the UEFA European Football Championship, a.k.a. the Euros. The Champions League obviously has no relevance to national team football, I agree. And again I have to disagree with you. The concentration of top-ranked teams is higher in the Euros, so any one team's passage to the final is likely to be harder.

    111. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited."
      What makes you say that?

      Do you need to ask?

      Or because that is where the winners come from, because they play the best football?

      This. They're not merely better. They're basically in a different tournament from the weaker teams. Yes, the rules are the same, they all qualify in, etc., but in terms of having a greater-than-0.001%-chance-of-winning, they're not there.

    112. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Part of the thing is empathizing with people going for it. From kids playing in empty lots to overpaid marketing robots trying to remember what playing for the game is about.

      Bad teams doing their best - and surpassing themselves - are more interesting than drones "doing time".

      When (fully) robotic-sports goes prime-time mainstream, the hype had better concentrate on strategists, the software, and hardware gang.

      But then, it'll just be a different type of car-racing - minus the pilot.

    113. Re:Good News is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not really a World Cup, it's a European-South American Cup with a couple countries from other continents invited.

      Now THAT makes sense! That's why we have the world series of baseball with only 2 countries playing!

      The World Cup is an international event. The World Series is a league championship. Baseball's international event is the World Baseball Classic where 16 teams compete.

      The World Series is more like the Champions League final. It's just that baseball only has one top level league, which is full of international talent.

    114. Re:Good News is... by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      Like the World Series, We all know the internet is a developed-world-only stuff... :D

      But in all seriousness local soccer assocs have direct line with the FIFA, you know, every statistic of every local match (A series) is sent to the FIFA.

    115. Re:Good News is... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      But there is still a case for saying the European Cup is harder. Croatia, Sweden, Ukraine and Russia DNQ'd for FIFA 2010, whereas Cameroon, New Zealand and Nigeria (and of course South Africa) did.

      Who cares about Croatia, Sweden, Ukraine, Russia, Cameroon, New Zealand or Nigeria? Argentina and Brazil matter far, far more. They're the strongest non-European teams, and any tournament where they're not allowed to compete is poorer for it.

      If Croatia, Sweden, Ukraine and Russia are good enough to win the world cup, then they should have no problem qualifying. If they don't qualify, then it's clearly not a good year for them, and not having them in the tournament is not a terrible loss. But not allowing countries to qualify in the first place, means there's a chance that the strongest team in the world is not present in your tournament.

      Nobody denies that of any regional tournament, the European championship is by far the strongest, but in the World Cup, you get the best European teams and the best teams of the rest of the world.

    116. Re:Good News is... by Kavafy · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that in the World Cup, you have the best teams mixed with a lot of weaker teams. Therefore the best teams have an easier passage to the later rounds. But in the Euros you have more of a concentration of top teams.

    117. Re:Good News is... by Brad1138 · · Score: 1

      So are you the spell check police? You'll spend your whole life here.

      --
      If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people
    118. Re:Good News is... by uvajed_ekil · · Score: 1

      Do you need to ask? [Why some are alleging the World Cup is not really a WORLD cup]

      Yes, obviously. That's why I did, and why I explained what makes the World Cup a world cup.

      So... what you want is a second-tier tournament for the weaker teams? That's fine, but no one wants to be the king of the slum. I don't know where you are from, but in the USA, the NCAA college basketball tournament is a big deal, and just earning a ticket in is an honor for many schools. Winning is a very big deal, and everyone loves seeing a low seed make an unlikely deep run. There is also the NIT, a tournament comprised of teams who weren't good enough to make it into the NCAA tournament. No one cares about the NIT, no one, and it is not unheard of for teams to reject invitations to the tournament. If you have a fair chance of getting it but can't win, get better, or don't bother. The competition itself is fair, poor [but unbiased] officiating aside. I'm sorry if you are troubled by Trinidad-Tobago, Nepal, Gabon, and Canada not being any good, but they're just not.

      --
      This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
    119. Re:Good News is... by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      The UN doesn't allow Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales to all participate separately. Perhaps the lower burden of countryhood is why they have more member?

      If we allowed all the US states to be separate members of some sports organization they would have more members than the EU, but the point that I was trying to get at is that there are other ways to measure things than number of members.

      I do like that people took an obvious final jab at the "World Series" of Baseball and similarly named American events and took me as a soccer hater.

    120. Re:Good News is... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Americans, like their counter-parts in the middle east, hate everything that threatens their view of TEH MOST GLORIOUS NATION ON TEH PLANETXORZ!!!1!ONE! ALL HAIL AMERICA!... ...you know what I mean. I fuckin’ hate it. Not even the French are nearly as bad at that.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  2. K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by masterwit · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mr. KDawson,

    To correctly link to a text only version, use the MySlate feature found here, select your story, press view story, and link the new link. That way thousands of users will not have to press "cancel print".

    thanks,

    -Everyone

    Link without the print:

    http://www.slate.com/Apps/MySlate/action/read.aspx?action=read&ids=2259350&sortmethod=false

    --
    We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
    1. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Too Late! KDawson has the worms eating at his brain....

    2. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by socz · · Score: 1

      What was that? I had to get up and check the printer for some stuff that came out.

      --
      My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    3. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by drewhk · · Score: 2, Funny

      We need a "+1 Mean" moderation option.

    4. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by serialband · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You could always run noscript for firefox or run opera with javascript turned off. It's not necessary to keep javascript on by default for every page that you visit.

    5. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by Nethead · · Score: 5, Funny

      Damn you Dawson!

      I had the 48" pen plotter selected as my default printer.

      I'll be sending you a wall poster of the article with my bill.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    6. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or surf with NoScript active.

    7. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by blair1q · · Score: 4, Funny

      I had the 3D printer set up to make a solid gold PS3 controller. Now I have a solid gold Slate article. Oh yes, the bill will be forthcoming.

    8. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by Nethead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Even more improbable but funnier.

      Let me see if I can top it.

      Damn you to hell Dawson!

      I was about to download the CAD files to our production robots and clicked on your link.

      Please accept the delivery of your 10,000 Ford Slate "automobiles". Please see the finance manager to arrange payment.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    9. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by masterwit · · Score: 1

      I used to, but it was too annoying to turn off. I have a few "installations/run settings" on my browser, but my no script browser session is tied in with my no cookies, activex (or COM for you MS people haha), etc. Good point though :)

      --
      We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
    10. Re:K-dawg, here is a feature for you! by imakemusic · · Score: 4, Funny

      I am a neuroscientist working on a direct connection from internet to brain. I am now slate.com as are 300 of my test subjects. We will report future articles directly to Slashdot with the power of our minds. You may pay via direct debit or with any major credit card.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  3. Correlation is not causation by hkz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry for shooting for the obvious, but the old trope about correlation and causation seems exactly in order here.

    1. Re:Correlation is not causation by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

      I would like to see the correlation betwen per capita income versus toxoplasmosis infection and versus world cup wins. I suspect that is the driving factor for both of those.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    2. Re:Correlation is not causation by troubbble · · Score: 1

      Yes. Data mining can certainly be fun, but it's silly to call it news until the link is investigated and solid theoretical evidence is found to support a causal relationship.

    3. Re:Correlation is not causation by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not to mention they're very nonchalant about a parasite that is extremely harmful to pregnant women and their unborn child. It's not exactly harmless in other adults either; a girl I know was seriously sick from some weeks after contracting toxoplasmosis and said she felt weakened for months afterward. Last thing we need is idiots going around licking cats to improve their football (that's right America football not soccer) skils.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    4. Re:Correlation is not causation by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful
      It's more than that, the article is an effective demonstration of how you can prove anything with statistics, and if you want to make sure you are right, you have to make sure the statistics actually establish the case.

      For this story we can look at it another way, and see that toxoplasmosis mortality shows the final four in this year's world cup should be Brazil, USA, Mexico and South Africa. Obviously that didn't happen, so this story is wrong.

      Obviously my evidence there is weak too, but it shows you can prove anything if you look at it correctly. In the case of this story, he cherry picked statistics that supported his thesis (which is also what I did). Of course the author knows this, and pointed out some contradicting data himself:

      The relationship is neither linear nor foolproof. Italy managed to win the World Cup in 2006, despite its relatively average infection rate of 33 percent. Certain African countries plagued with public health problems have astronomical Toxo rates. Yet the heavily infected players of Ghana, Gabon (71 percent), and the Ivory Coast (60 percent) have not yet managed to win a single cup. On the other end, England (6 percent), the U.S. (12 percent), and Japan (6 percent) are pretty OK at soccer yet have some of the lowest rates in the world.

      Basically it is a case of someone noticing an interesting coincidence and wanting to point it out to everyone, but it seems there's about as much evidence for it as there is for an octopus choosing world cup winners.

      Bottom line: if you want to know for sure, you have to make sure the statistics are sound.

      --
      Qxe4
    5. Re:Correlation is not causation by hkz · · Score: 3, Funny

      Holland has an infection rate of "eventually 80%" (source: http://www.nvkc.nl/tijdschrift/content/1999/nr%201/p65/1999-1-p65.pdf ), which does eerily correlate with our soon-to-be world cup win. (Disclaimer: there are orange crowds singing outside after "our" win to Uruguay, and to Germany I would like to say, "Schade Deutschland, alles ist vorbei!" ;-)

    6. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      solid theoretical evidence

      interesting phrase.

      When it comes down to it:

      Correlation == recorded observations

      Causation == bulshit we make up

      so, yeah ... correlation is not causation. It is better. The very idea that causation exists as something other than than a human yearning for order is not backed up by empirical evidence.

    7. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Explain extremely low p-values in randomized clinical trials then. :)

      All type-1 error by your theory, right?

    8. Re:Correlation is not causation by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Schade Deutschland, alles ist vorbei!"

      Jeez man, do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

    9. Re:Correlation is not causation by troubbble · · Score: 1

      You make an interesting observation--I only wish you would have logged in so I could take you more seriously.

    10. Re:Correlation is not causation by Surt · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah ... this kind of 'shorten your shotgun barrel til you hit something' research bugs me.

      This is so easily tested, too. Pick a loser country with a relatively small population, and start infecting their water supplies with toxo. Watch them start to win year after year. Case proved.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    11. Re:Correlation is not causation by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Sorry for shooting for the obvious, but the old trope about correlation and causation seems exactly in order here.

      You make an excellent point. If the company that makes the World Cup trophies has a serious cat infestation, then winners will be more likely to be exposed to the parasite than losers.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    12. Re:Correlation is not causation by CharlyFoxtrot · · Score: 1

      I just hope the finals end with a penalty shoot-out because I could do with a good laugh.

      --
      If all else fails, immortality can always be assured by spectacular error.
    13. Re:Correlation is not causation by h4rr4r · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You silly wood shoe wearing pot smoking bastards are going down. Then you can go home a stick your fingers in your dikes.

    14. Re:Correlation is not causation by mangu · · Score: 1

      For this story we can look at it another way, and see that toxoplasmosis mortality shows the final four in this year's world cup should be Brazil, USA, Mexico and South Africa. Obviously that didn't happen, so this story is wrong.

      Wait, you should look further. The four finalists are Spain, Netherlands, Germany, and Uruguay.

      Uruguay lost to Netherlands today, which is consistent with them being in the last place in the list you linked. Netherlands won, which means the worst place they will get in this cup is second, also consistent with that list.

      That leaves tomorrow's game, Spain vs. Germany. Spain had three deaths, Germany only one, which means tomorrow Spain will defeat Germany and will also defeat Netherlands in the final match. In the match for third place Germany will defeat Uruguay.

      So, what if next sunday the results are 1 - Spain, 2 - Netherlands, 3 - Germany, 4 - Uruguay? Well, AFAIK today, I'd bet on 1 - Germany, 2 - Netherlands, 3 - Spain, 4 - Uruguay.

    15. Re:Correlation is not causation by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Researcher: "We found an interesting correlation between A and B, and here's a possible mechanism by which A may increase the probability of B."

      Press release: "Scientists prove A causes B!"

      Random /. reader: "Here's a case where B happened without A! Lies, damned lies, and statistics! Stupid scientists! Correlation is not causation! Look how smart I am!"

      You can be as confident in predicting this cycle in any /. story which mentions anything having to do with statistics as you can in predicting that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    16. Re:Correlation is not causation by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      To be fair, in this case, the story is actually written by the scientist himself.

      --
      Qxe4
    17. Re:Correlation is not causation by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      True. It's also true that the researcher/writer is very careful not to make any absolute claims. He's just saying, as I said above, "here's this interesting correlation, and here's a possible causal mechanism." In such cases, a lot of people seem to take step two in my list above themselves -- they read the reasonable claim, turn it into an unreasonable claim in their own heads, and then proceed to tear that unreasonable claim down. It's amusing and a little sad that such people often link to the Philosophy 101 lists of logical fallacies that abound on the web; perhaps they should try reading down those lists until they encounter the phrase "straw man."

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    18. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is easy to take a sufficiently constrained view of the universe that there appear to be order. Just as it is easy to take a sufficiently constrained view of the universe that there appear to be chaos.

      Whether the apparent chaos is just a localized absence of recognized order, or the apparent order is just interesting patterns in the chaos ... that's a hard question to answer.

    19. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sigh. Some joker always gets modded up with Correlation != Causation in all stories such as this.

      From the article:

      "Finally, it's possible—likely, even—that the correlation between Toxo infection and World Cup success is a coincidence"

      Actually, I'm the idiot here, assuming people read articles and are capable of thinking that other people aren't complete morons (bad reporting doesn't necessarily mean bad science).

    20. Re:Correlation is not causation by zz5555 · · Score: 1

      "For this story we can look at it another way, and see that toxoplasmosis mortality [nationmaster.com] shows the final four in this year's world cup should be Brazil, USA, Mexico and South Africa. Obviously that didn't happen, so this story is wrong."

      I'm not saying this story is correct, but your reasoning is definitely incorrect. The summary says, "Countries with greater incidence of this parasitic infection in their populations tend to win more World Cups than those without." This would just imply that countries with high infection rates are more likely to win, not that they will win any particular game. Winning a particular game is just anecdotal data and not really relevant in and of itself. So your reasoning does not show that the story is wrong.

    21. Re:Correlation is not causation by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      (that's right America football not soccer)

      If you insist on using British English in all circumstances, try entering an American bar and telling the guy next to you that you're dying for a fag.

    22. Re:Correlation is not causation by blair1q · · Score: 1

      Exactly.

      Although I don't know why they didn't use the correlation between World Cup success and genital shaving.

      This is the Internet, after all.

    23. Re:Correlation is not causation by phantomfive · · Score: 0, Troll

      Your telling me that you my reasoning based on the article is wrong because of what you read in the summary? Please, I am totally in favor of becoming more accurate in my reasoning, but at least read the story if you're going to split hairs.

      --
      Qxe4
    24. Re:Correlation is not causation by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      He's just saying, as I said above, "here's this interesting correlation, and here's a possible causal mechanism."

      And this disagrees with what I said, how? Either you need to improve your reading comprehension, or I need to improve my writing.

      --
      Qxe4
    25. Re:Correlation is not causation by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Informative

      > ...that's right America football not soccer...

      Association football. Wouldn't want to confuse it with rugby football or gridiron football...

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    26. Re:Correlation is not causation by 7-Vodka · · Score: 1

      Not only this but I can also point out the proposed human symptoms (which also come from correlation type studies):

      1. Decreased novelty-seeking behaviour
      2. Slower reactions[citation needed]
      3. Lower rule-consciousness and greater jealousy (in men)
      4. Promiscuity and greater conscientiousness (in women)
      5. Studies have found that toxoplasmosis is associated with an increased car accident rate in people with Rh-negative blood. The chance of an accident relative to uninfected people is increased roughly 2.5 times. This may be due to the slowed reaction times that are associated with infection.

      Slower reaction times and 2.5x greater chance of being involved in car accidents don't sound like a way to make a better football player.

      --

      Liberty.

    27. Re:Correlation is not causation by zz5555 · · Score: 1

      Um, yeah, but the story says the same thing. Ie: "It looks like having some Toxoplasma gondii in the collective brains of your home country makes your team a little bit better at soccer, so long as you're already among the top teams in the sport." But as anyone who's ever been involved in any kind of human competition will tell you, being a little bit better doesn't mean that you will win every time. Again, I'm not saying their reasoning is any better, but you can't take one particular event (this year's World Cup) and use it to disprove their claim. So your reasoning is still deficient. So there! :)

    28. Re:Correlation is not causation by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      oh, I never said I had disproved their claim, I said their statistical evidence isn't very good. I also backed this up with a quote from the article. So. In addition to reading more than just the summary, please at least read my post!!! :)

      --
      Qxe4
    29. Re:Correlation is not causation by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      You wrote, "the article is an effective demonstration of how you can prove anything with statistics ... toxoplasmosis mortality [nationmaster.com] shows the final four in this year's world cup should be Brazil, USA, Mexico and South Africa. Obviously that didn't happen, so this story is wrong." In that post, it sure looks to me like you're attributing things to the author he never said, and making over-the-top claims about the results which his findings "should" imply. Granted, the article starts out with a grandiose claim ("What if I told you that last week I predicted all eight winners of a round of the World Cup?") but once he gets into the nitty-gritty of the analysis, it's clear that he's not cherry-picking or making any unjustifiable inferences.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    30. Re:Correlation is not causation by sznupi · · Score: 1

      ...as you can in predicting that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow

      How does that work for those with polar day though?

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    31. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aha! But that's what the parasite wants you to ... umm ... You sir are correct. Correlation is not causation. Here kitty!

    32. Re:Correlation is not causation by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      Dang, my writing must be horrible today for you to have such a bad misunderstanding; look what I wrote

      For this story we can look at it another way......Obviously my evidence there is weak too, but it shows you can prove anything if you look at it correctly.

      Furthermore, once you get into the nitty gritty of my post, you see I am not condemning the author either, just the grandiosity of his initial statements:

      Basically it is a case of someone noticing an interesting coincidence and wanting to point it out to everyone, but it seems there's about as much evidence for it as there is for an octopus choosing world cup winners.

      Hopefully next time you will read more carefully before attacking, even if my writing is bad.

      --
      Qxe4
    33. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      Just use the alternative used in Spain and other countries that speak latin languages. Fútbol FTW.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    34. Re:Correlation is not causation by Cimexus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Indeed. The problem with a word like 'football' is how generic it is. It's not just North America that doesn't call association football, 'football'. It ain't usually called football in Australia or New Zealand either. Or Canada. Or South Africa (ironically enough).

      From Wikipedia (From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(word)):

      "Soccer has been the prevailing term for association football in the U.S., Canada, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, where other codes of football are dominant."

      So yeah, afraid to say it but, among countries whose main language is English, that leaves only the UK where football generally means association football.

      But it's a stupid thing to get worked up about considering that it's normally obvious from context what game is being talked about. I mean, in news articles about/match commentary for a World Cup match here in Australia, they'll often still call it football, because it's bleeding obvious what game is being talked about. But if you just said 'football' to someone in the street they'd usually assume you were talking about either rugby (northern/eastern Australian states) or AFK (southern/western Australian states).

    35. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What if I told you that last week I predicted all eight winners of a round of the World Cup? And that instead of rankings or divination all I did was look up how many people in each team's home country had a tiny parasite lurking in their amygdalas?"

      Did you even read the fucking article? No. But you still got +4 Insightful. Lame.

    36. Re:Correlation is not causation by kasimbaba · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The thing is, in American football (and rugby), the ball is mainly held by the hands rather than kicked. So why do these people insist on calling the game 'football'?

    37. Re:Correlation is not causation by alantus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      that's right America football not soccer

      Only the United States of America calls football "soccer". Every other country in America calls it football.

    38. Re:Correlation is not causation by zill · · Score: 1

      Last thing we need is idiots going around licking cats to improve their football (that's right America football not soccer) skils.

      Au contraire , my friend. Reports like these are perfect for cleansing mankind of idiots that fail to grasp simple logic. It's like eugenics, except the problem solves itself without any bloodshed or ill intent.

    39. Re:Correlation is NOT causation by ram.loss · · Score: 1

      How is this science? A slate article siting the economist?

      Bingo!, that should be a dead giveaway, the author is not trying to publish some paper. Wonder what exactly is he trying to do?...

      All this stuff about toxo changing the development of society is entertaining speculation but no data is presented here to make it more than that.

      Oh, I see.

      I think a brief look at the context should indicate that this article is aimed at entertaining with some speculation, wouldn't you think? I would save the scientific criticism until it appears on Science or Nature

    40. Re:Correlation is not causation by iNaya · · Score: 2, Funny

      And if you insist on using American English on all occasions, try entering a British bar and telling the girl next to you that you like her pants.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    41. Re:Correlation is not causation by dwye · · Score: 1

      And if you insist on using American English on all occasions, try entering a British bar and telling the girl next to you that you like her pants.

      And why would I say that, unless I followed it with something like "Can I get you out of them?" or some other awful line?

      Or do you mean telling the girl next to you that you want in her pants?

    42. Re:Correlation is not causation by iNaya · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I failed.

      --
      The Unicode standard is over 20 years old. Why does Slashdot not support it?
    43. Re:Correlation is not causation by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      For example: many Ghanians celebrate their victories by feasting on undercooked cat meat.

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    44. Re:Correlation is not causation by nedlohs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because "football" has nothing to do with the ball mainly being kicked. Not by the modern meanings and not by the original usage of the word.

      So those people insist on using the word correctly, so I guess the real question is why do you want it to mean something entirely new?

    45. Re:Correlation is not causation by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Lol just realised I typed 'AFK' instead of 'AFL' in my post above. /. really needs an edit button.

    46. Re:Correlation is not causation by arivanov · · Score: 1

      Not quite so

      Toxo used to be common everywhere. It is carried by rats and in the days before treated water and strict sanitary control of meat and other produce most of the population carried the infection.

      Toxo infestation in the host is characterised by reckless behaviour and inability to assess risk as well as loss of instinct of selfpreservation. A rat infected with Toxo instead of running away from a predator will actually often go to it. This is actually a good treat in sports. All it takes is some percentage of the population to be infected to create a "win at all cost" mentality, peer pressure pretty much does the rest.

      By the way, the decrease in the level of toxo infection from nearly 100% a century ago to sub 10% today may be the reason why we do not take risks so willingly any more.

      --
      Baker's Law: Misery no longer loves company. Nowadays it insists on it
      http://www.sigsegv.cx/
    47. Re:Correlation is not causation by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Don't complement her fanny either.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    48. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful, some psychopathic nutjob in the DHS will read this and order it tried on some Middle Eastern / African / South American country with an installed dictatorship.

    49. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > ...that's right America football not soccer...

      Association football. Wouldn't want to confuse it with rugby football or gridiron football...

      Interestingly, "soccer" was originally a British term for the sport, a slang word built from the "soc" in "association football." It fell out of usage in the UK, but remained in use across the pond.

    50. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I almost found out the British definition the hard way, but the girl was actually really chill about it. I probably had a good chance of her coming back to the hotel with me, but her teeth were just a dealbreaker for me...

    51. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is, in American football (and rugby), the ball is mainly held by the hands rather than kicked. So why do these people insist on calling the game 'football'?

      Because football is played on foot and not on horseback. It has nothing to do with using your feet to kick the ball.

    52. Re:Correlation is not causation by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Just wait ... FIFA will come out with a test for performance enhancing parasites.

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    53. Re:Correlation is NOT causation by logistic · · Score: 1

      It's not posted in Idle it's posted under science. That's the context. Don't post under "science" and label it as written by a neuroscientist studying toxo! (leaving out that he's apparently a graduate student there) There's plenty of room to raise the quality of discussion of ideas outside of large journals like Nature and Science.

    54. Re:Correlation is not causation by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      You've discovered an interesting correlation between research and hype. But can you prove it?

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    55. Re:Correlation is not causation by instagib · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In fact, the general consensus is that the correct word would be 'handegg'.

    56. Re:Correlation is not causation by ejecta · · Score: 1

      You're forgetting Australia & New Zealand, mate.

      --
      Two Parts Swash, One Part Buckle
    57. Re:Correlation is not causation by ejecta · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because handball is already a defined sport and "football" is a ball game with major plays involving the kicking foot, so foot+ball = football.

      --
      Two Parts Swash, One Part Buckle
    58. Re:Correlation is not causation by Yamata+no+Orochi · · Score: 0

      You make an interesting observation--I only wish you would have logged in so I could take you more seriously.

      What a petty and embarrassing thing to admit to.

    59. Re:Correlation is not causation by Yamata+no+Orochi · · Score: 0

      Every other country in America calls it football.

      You're forgetting Australia & New Zealand, mate.

      Was I asleep for this colossal geographical event?

    60. Re:Correlation is not causation by SLot · · Score: 1

      Because Handegg sounds stupid?

    61. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly, he could just have easily concluded that symptoms of toxoplasmosis include bizarre looking faux-hawks and the tendency to lose your balance and fall down with a phantom leg injury when another person gets near you.

    62. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right, world: skills not skils.

    63. Re:Correlation is not causation by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      Hey! thats a tilde, slashcode is going to get mad :(

      But I support you idea, You all use "Gratis" anyway, you could get more RAEish and call it "Balon Pie".

    64. Re:Correlation is not causation by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

      It's even more problematic than that. Do you know how many different parasites are out there infecting humans world-wide? If you test the correlation between infection rates and world cup victories for all of them, you can be sure you will find some sort of correlation for one of them out of pure chance. This is the problem you get in every research when you compare too many variables.

      --
      Whenever in an argument, remember this.
    65. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      Hahaha, I'm not from Spain. I'm from Argentina. And I hate the fucking stupid policy of the RAE and most Spanish people of "translate fucking everything".

      You have to listen to Spaniards calling a firewall a "cortafuegos" and a motherboard a "placa madre".

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    66. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because these games came out of 'Association' football.

      Rugby happened because some idiot picked up the ball and ran with it in a soccer game.

      American Football happened because they heard about Rugby and decided a year after the first British rugby match to have a game of it them selves. Not knowing the exact rules (not that there were any back then) they invented their own and it evolved from there.

      Aussie Rules football came out of Gaelic Football, which also is another form of 'Association Football', and in both of those you do kick the ball with the foot quite a lot.

      Canadian Football developed along similar lines to the US version of the game.

      Japan used to have a game that only the samurai were allowed to play that translates directly as 'kicking a ball', but was never professional and I'm not sure if the rules were ever codified.

      There are probably other versions of football I am unaware of, but all those listed above are the versions I know of (with Rugby coming in League and Union varieties). All except the Japanese version evolved from 'Soccer', and from what I understand the Japanese version was similar to 'Soccer'. Thus, they all qualify as 'football' in the same way that all types of ducks are ducks, even though some are white (like Donald), others are black (like Daffy) and others are teal, wood etc etc etc. though they live in different areas, act differently, eat different diets, some migrate, others don't etc.

    67. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because its played on foot, and not horseback. The term has been around for a long time.

      From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(word)

      "These sports were usually played by peasants, as opposed to the horse-riding sports more often enjoyed by aristocrats."

      Also:

      "Where English is a first language the unqualified use of the word football is used to refer to the most popular code of football in that region."

    68. Re:Correlation is not causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      grandparent:
      Every other country in America calls it football

      parent:
      You're forgetting Australia & New Zealand, mate.

      If you hadn't ended your comment with "mate" I would've assumed, from your knowledge in geographics, that you're american. Now I'm confused.

    69. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Why would I speak the incorrect foreign language version, rather than speak English when speaking English? That's like the people that say people from the US aren't "Americans" because that's confusing to Spanish speakers who don't have an accurate grasp of the English language.

    70. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      "where other codes are more popular (the United States, Canada, Australia, and South Africa), the sport is more commonly referred to as soccer."

      So what were you saying about other countries?

    71. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Because, at the time, it was important to distinguish games played on foot from those played while mounted. Why do people who don't understand etymology insist on insisting it's someone else's ignorance that's causing all the problems?

    72. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      They are Americans. It is just that we are Americans too. And you are the ones mistaken in that case. Because "America" is an Spanish name, that was given to the continent by Spanish speakers, being derived from an Italian name. That's right, the name you use for yourselves is Italian/Spanish. Amerigo Vespucci was an explorer and cartographer. His name was taken by the Spanish crown to refer to ALL of the new world. Then, in America, there were many states. Among them, there were a few, that decided to form a coalition. Since they were in America, they coalition was called the United States of America. Put the emphasis in that last part: OF America. That means, those states are not America in itself. They are part of America. We are all Americans.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    73. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yet, when Mexico named themselves, they decided to be the United States of Mexico, and not of America. And aside from one person that I know who was Argentinian who purposefully wanted to deceive people into thinking that he was a citizen of the USA, I don't know of anyone that identifies themselves as "American" when asked where they are from, except those from the USA.

    74. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      The Mexico thing has nothing to do with your name.
      Your ad-hominem attack on me mentioning that Argentinian you know has nothing to do with this. I was born in Argentina, and I live in Argentina, and I will never leave my country. The case of that man has nothing to do with this.
      The fact that all US citizens call themselves America, and that Immigrants do not call themselves that has also nothing to do with this.

      Go and read some history. Talking about what you heard your fellow countryman call themselves is no historic proof. I am not saying that you can't call yourselves Americans, I am saying that pretending that the word is the name of your country, and neglecting the history and real meaning of the word is stupid.

      Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerigo_Vespucci

      Amerigo Vespucci (March 9, 1454 – February 22, 1512) was an Italian explorer, navigator and cartographer. The continents of North America and South America are generally believed to have derived their name from the feminized Latin version of his first name.

      Also, there are countless songs, books, and other pieces of culture both ancient and modern that talk about "America" in the sense of the whole continent.

      Also from Wikipedia:

      many Canadians resent being referred to as Americans because of mistaken assumptions that they are U.S. citizens or an inability—particularly of people overseas—to distinguish Canadian English and American English accents.

      See that? Canadians ARE Americans, they just don't want to be called that because of confusion with your country.

      Now, let's go through each language:

      Spanish usage
      In Spanish, América is the name of a region considered a single continent composed of the subcontinents of Sudamérica and Norteamérica, the land bridge of Centroamérica, and the islands of the Antillas. Americano/a in Spanish refers to a person from América in a similar way that europeo or europea refers to a person from Europa. The terms sudamericano/a, centroamericano/a, antillano/a and norteamericano/a can be used to more specifically refer to the location where a person may live.
      Citizens of the United States of America are normally referred to by the term estadounidense (rough literal translation: "United-Statesian") instead of americano or americana, and the country's name itself is often translated as Estados Unidos de Norteamérica. Also, the term norteamericano may refer to a citizen of the United States. This term is primarily used to refer to citizens of the United States, rarely those of other North American countries.

      Portuguese usage
      In Portuguese, the word americano refers to the whole of the Americas. But, in Brazil and Portugal, it is widely used to refer to the citizens of the United States. The least ambiguous term, estadunidense (used in Brazil), something like "United Statesian" or "estadounidense" in Spanish), and "ianque"—the Portuguese version of "Yankee"—are rarely used. América, however, is rarely used as synonym to the country, and almost never in print and in more formal environments, where the US is called either Estados Unidos da América (i.e. United States of America) or simply Estados Unidos (i.e. United States). There is some difference between the usage of these words in Portugal and in Brazil, with the Portuguese being more prone to apply the term América to the country.

      Russian usage
      In the 19th century in Russia the word "America" was used for a traditional continent such as Europe and Asia. In the 20th century these traditional continents are known as "parts of the world". Now the term "continent" means any of six large continuous landmasses (Eurasia, Africa, North America, South America, Antarctica, and Australia). Now the word Ameria refers to the United States more often than to America as a "part of the world". There is no term equivalent to "Americas" in Russian.

      If you take

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    75. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The Mexico thing has nothing to do with your name.

      Sure it does. People from The United States of Mexico are called Mexicans, just like people from the USA are called Americans. That's the proper term for it, and no one else ever gets confused.

      Your ad-hominem attack on me mentioning that Argentinian you know has nothing to do with this.

      Perhaps it's an Argentinian thing. I had no idea where you are or your nationality. I stated I only knew one person on the planet who traveled to foreign countries and asserted his origin as "American" and he did so not because he thought himself more as a continental American, but as an Argentinian who was purposefully trying to deceive others into thinking he was a US national.

      I was born in Argentina, and I live in Argentina, and I will never leave my country. The case of that man has nothing to do with this.

      Then it isn't an ad hominem. Or do you not know what that means? I was talking about someone else. And insulting someone else by calling him a liar in no way reflects on you, and thus can't be an ad hominem. Insults aren't ad hominem. Saying "GNUALMAFUERTE is an idiot, so you shouldn't listen to him" is an ad hominem. Just calling you an idiot is not an ad hominem, unless you can show that I'm saying so not to express my opinion, but instead to color your words with that brush to attack your argument.

      But then, that's a level of finesse you've proven you don't grasp. So feel free to continue to use words in a manner you don't understand. It's obvious you have and will continue to do so.

      Spanish usage

      Really? You are telling an native English speaker that their knowledge of English is wrong, and using other languages in order to prove your point? Do you not understand language? Whatever the etymology is irrelevant to the actual usage. I have a dashboard in my car. It has never seen dash. It isn't a board. Yet it retains the name. It is meaningful to know how words got to where they are, but where they came from *never* trumps their actual usage. And here I am getting a lecture in English from someone who isn't a native speaker, yet asserts to know the language better than all the native speakers on the planet. Ego much?

      Here is this situation as experienced by a US citizen living in another country:

      Again, he's talking about how Americans are called in Spanish. Irrelevant to how they are called in the US. For all your stupid whining, you might as well argue that an American who goes to Argentina and makes a mistake and proclaims themselves to be "embarazado" because embarrassed in English sounds closer to that word than pregnant.

      Give up the stupid "that's not how people in other languages call you" argument and you'll have nothing left. The only people who call themselves American are those from the USA, so the word is not ambiguous at all, and only those who are not native speakers (and come from a place that has differing terms, like the embarrassed example above) have any confusion. And it's because of their ignorance, not the ignorance of those from the USA.

      You are an illiterate bastard, and you understand nothing about geography or history, and you base your claim on the fact that you feel "American".

      I don't "feel" American. I am an American citizen.

      I was born in Argentina, and I live in Argentina, and I will never leave my country.

      Sounds like you are the arrogant little prick who bought into some propaganda. Go to China. They don't have the problem of language you have. They call people from the USA "Americans" and distinguish those from everywhere else by using the proper term for the country of origin, rather than continent for those from the Americas. Note, the Americas, not America. There are North and South American continents, and no location of "America" other than that being the shortened term for the Unites States of America, just like those from The

    76. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      I was actually trying to have an honest discussion regarding the word America. The only thing that has a place in such a discussion is Etymology, and Etymology says it is an Italian first name, borrowed by Spanish speakers to name a piece of land first conquered by Spanish people in 1492. Centuries later your country borrowed that name. That is what Etymology says. Any discussion about this issue should be on those basis. If you have any other evidence to the contrary in etymological terms, please post it.

      Regarding the rest of your post, I've traveled enough, and I plan to continue doing so. I speak several languages. As a matter of fact, I am answering you in your own language, while I'm hearing little Spanish coming from your side.

      I am not saying that you can't call yourself American, or that it is wrong in any way to call your fellow citizens that way.

      I am saying that denying that the continent is also named America, and denying telling other people that talking about "America" while speaking about the whole continent is wrong.

      We were using America to refer to the whole continent, then you borrowed the term to name your country. Just accept that simple fact, and continue to call yourself American as much as you want.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    77. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I was actually trying to have an honest discussion regarding the word America.

      Then stop accusing me of ad hominems when I didn't commit one and you did. Stop asserting I'm an arrogant ass that bought propaganda when you are the one that turns around and asserts you've never left your country and never will and you state it like it makes your comments more valid, not less. Stop asserting you know the English language better than a native speaker. Stop asserting you know better how people are and like to be called when you've never traveled. I've been to your country and you've never been to mine. I'd assert that indicates that I may have a more worldly view, but you assert the opposite.

      You aren't trying to have an honest discussion, you are trying to lecture me, and it comes across like a 3 year old who thinks they know the truth and they are lecturing an adult on how the world works.

      We were using America to refer to the whole continent, then you borrowed the term to name your country.

      So? "America" means something different in English than it does in Spanish. Just like asistir and assist are essentially the same in letters but unrelated in meaning. And they came from the same bases. So is one "wrong" and the other "right"? Or are they both right, but just in different languages?

      Just accept that simple fact, and continue to call yourself American as much as you want.

      I accept the fact that they came from the same word originally. But they mean different things in different languages. Can you accept that?

    78. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      I accept the fact that they came from the same word originally. But they mean different things in different languages. Can you accept that?

      Yes, America in Spanish it means a beautiful continent. In English it means bigotry, religious fundamentalism, racism and war.

      And FYI, I've traveled a lot, and I've been in the US enough times to understand why I didn't want to vacation there in the first place. I have some great friends that are from the US, but sadly for them and for ~25% of the US population, the other 75% is like you.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    79. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I was born in Argentina, and I live in Argentina, and I will never leave my country.

      And FYI, I've traveled a lot, and I've been in the US enough times to understand why I didn't want to vacation there in the first place.

      As a native speaker to one who isn't, I will suggest that you add "again" to your first statement. Even though future tense, it also has implications about the past. Since you seem to miss some of the small parts of the language in a manner that means the complete opposite of what you mean, that will help you fix that.

      Yes, America in Spanish it means a beautiful continent. In English it means bigotry, religious fundamentalism, racism and war.

      Again, the non native speaker asserts to know the language better than the sum of native speakers on the planet. And you call Americans bigoted. You would do well in America. You are not only 100% wrong, but very confident in your ignorance and willing to spread it around the world. I guess that's why it bugs you so much, because people always hate most that which they see in themselves.

      I have some great friends that are from the US, but sadly for them and for ~25% of the US population, the other 75% is like you.

      You haven't been right about anything so far, so I wouldn't expect you to start now. I am not a member of the US population. But the truth and your statements have no correlation, so keep on guessing wrong. Maybe someday your ignorant rants will be correct just based on chance. Are you sure you aren't American?

    80. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      You are either a very sophisticated troll, or just plain stupid.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    81. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      You use the English language incorrectly multiple times in ways I point out. You find offense at me pointing out you are wrong and proving it.

      As you have no points you specifically disagree on, I must assume you agree 100%, but that you don't like the conclusions. So you are taking your ball and going home. Feel free. I'm not requiring you to respond. It's just that when you respond with gross errors, I'm going to correct you so that no one else takes your incorrect English, spoken by a non-native and with great personal bias, as even remotely resembling the truth.

      Of course you'll call me an ignorant American. I'm not in the USA and I'm a native speaker of the language, so I know better how English is used than some arrogant prick in Argentina who not only can't use "ad hominem" correctly, but makes mistakes that indicate they have never left Argentina, when that's not the case, and doesn't know what "American" means in English because they are too wrapped up in their own language to open their eyes. No, I know exactly the type of person you are. Just like the liar I met from Argentina that wanted people to think he was American because he desperately wants to be. Your name wouldn't happen to be Louis by chance?

    82. Re:Correlation is not causation by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1

      Look mama! I am winning on the internet making arguments that make no sense! And with no hands!

      You are a douchebag. Go back to the states. The way you neglect logic will only be tolerated in Texas.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    83. Re:Correlation is not causation by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry you don't understand English. Perhaps the problem is the Argentinian school system. You should get them to teach real English, and not whatever dialect you learned.

  4. Correlation != Causation by cmpaul · · Score: 1

    ... which is what the author seems to imply, despite the headline.

    1. Re:Correlation != Causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the fucking headline SAYS correlation, you fucking flaming doosh!

    2. Re:Correlation != Causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's why the fucking comment you replied to said "despite the headline", you ignorant cocksponge.

  5. Brain parasite... by nebaz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Do any of these parasites modify your voice timbre and give you glowing eyes and create in you a desire to build healing sarcophagi?

    --
    Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
    1. Re:Brain parasite... by nalidog · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, but they can make you play the holophonor like a pro.

    2. Re:Brain parasite... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, but I have given pleasure to the world because I have such a beautiful ass.

    3. Re:Brain parasite... by mog007 · · Score: 1

      What about my brain? Will they make me smarter than Cher?

    4. Re:Brain parasite... by brendan.hill · · Score: 1

      No, that's normal.

      (what, isn't it?)

    5. Re:Brain parasite... by metlin · · Score: 1

      Only if you're Daniel Jackson. And die. Again.

  6. Funny coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most countries participating in the World Cup are parasites.

  7. Poor Tommy... by mark72005 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We've just come back from Tommy's funeral and you are talking about a skag deal?

    1. Re:Poor Tommy... by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just pointing out, this comment is not actually off topic, it's a reference to Trainspotting. In the film one of the characters dies of Toxoplasmosis complicated by AIDS. The guy was also a huge soccer fan.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    2. Re:Poor Tommy... by guyminuslife · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nice reference. I haven't felt that good since Archie Gemmel scored against Holland in 1978.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    3. Re:Poor Tommy... by jambox · · Score: 1

      Archie Gemmill had all sorts of parasites, the dirty old bastard.

      --
      You thought you could break the laws of physics without paying the PRICE?
    4. Re:Poor Tommy... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      No worries. Tommy later ended up in Rome doing pretty well for himself.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    5. Re:Poor Tommy... by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      Goal or not, it's still shite being Scottish.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  8. Correlation is not causation by Mathinker · · Score: 1

    The author of this article should watch out that he doesn't start to be classed with, e.g., Randy Thornhill. Thornhill just loves publishing sensational stuff about various correlations.

    Oh, yeah, and before I forget... there's an xkcd for that....

  9. Despite popular belief... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Correlation and causation can coexist. In fact, causation implies correlation. However, those who know their predicate logic know that the converse is not necessarily true.

  10. Is this... by Relic+of+the+Future · · Score: 1

    ...Is this from the same group of scientist that claim parasites are responsible for EVERYTHING?

    --
    Those who fail to understand communication protocols, are doomed to repeat them over port 80.
    1. Re:Is this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I'm not going to defend any particular hypothesis about the effects of toxoplasma gondii on behavior, the parasite does concentrate in areas of the human brain that are responsible for regulation of dopamine and serotonin. Both of those molecules are vital in the reward system, motor control and consolidation of memory (particularly procedural memory). Concentrations of both of those neurotransmitters have major effects on neural function over a considerable range of timescales -- from milliseconds through minutes, at the least -- effects which differ over the various timescales.

      We don't yet fully understand the roles of any of the "big four" (Acetylcholine, Dopamine, Noradrenaline and Seratonin) neurotransmitter systems in the brain... but one or more of them is associated with just about every psychiatric disorder yet defined, not to mention that there are receptors for those molecules all over the brain, specifically in areas required for motor control and homeostasis such as the basal ganglia and hypothalamus. While a definitive link between parasite infection and specific differences in behavior is not going to be found any time soon, the idea that parasite infections cause measurable differences in aggregate behavior is completely reasonable and consistent with our current knowledge, and can be appropriately studied at the population level.

    2. Re:Is this... by wanax · · Score: 1

      The above was not meant to be posted anon.. must have mis-clicked.

  11. cough by SuperBanana · · Score: 1, Redundant
    1. Re:cough by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Funny

      This meme isn't fashionable anymore. You were supposed to post an XKCD comic instead.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:cough by Dynedain · · Score: 1

      This meme isn't fashionable anymore. You were supposed to post an XKCD comic instead.

      Obligatory XKCD link

      --
      I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
    3. Re:cough by PPH · · Score: 1

      What's the probability that this link will appear in replies to stories about statistical studies?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:cough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hence the title of the article says "correlated". At least read the title before you post.

    5. Re:cough by corbettw · · Score: 1

      1.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    6. Re:cough by Reilaos · · Score: 1

      I always found this phrasing odd. Of course it IMPLIES causation. It never NECESSITATES it, however. Implication is not the same as equality. Certain jokes can imply that the joke-teller is sleeping with your mother, but that doesn't necessarily make it true.

    7. Re:cough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes; you should read that article. Once you observe a statistically significant correlation, there are only a few possibilities for how it can come about, and they all involve causation somewhere. That's why correlations are so interesting and why people keep reporting them.

  12. Interesting fact by Itninja · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A bit OT, but I thought it was a fact worth mentioning:

    The most common carrier of Toxoplasma gondii are cats. When a cat with Toxo injures a rat (but does not kill it) it usually passes the infection to the rat. The effect of the parasite on rats makes them slower and far easier for predators (like cats) to catch/kill them. Which, in turn, passes the parasite on to the cat. The cat then takes a swipe at a rat...and so on ad infinitum.

    The parasite uses the natural predator/prey relationship to keep itself alive.

    --
    I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
    1. Re:Interesting fact by nweaver · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, its more subtle, it removes the FEAR of cats, and in fact makes male rats horney around the scent of cat urine!

      --
      Test your net with Netalyzr
    2. Re:Interesting fact by Antony+T+Curtis · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Toxo infection in rats not only makes the rats reaction time slower: It has been documented in detail that it also appears to modify the behaviour of the infected rats.

      Infected rats are likely to be "suicidal" insofar as putting themselves in the path of cats, hanging out near to where they smell feline urination and/or feces.

      It is in the interest of the parasite to make the rats exceedingly easy to find/kill so that they may complete their life cycle.

      --
      No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
    3. Re:Interesting fact by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 5, Informative

      More than that, the parasite doesn't just slow the rats, it actually modifies their behavior, sometimes making them attracted to cats and cat urine. It does do some strange things in humans too, e.g. it is possibly correlated to schizophrenia. I personally have always wondered if Toxoplasmosis is what causes people to keep dozens of cats in a confined space like an apartment. Having been in places like that, I can't think of a logical reason why one would otherwise want so many cats around.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    4. Re:Interesting fact by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      I have two cats and probably this parasite, those people are just nuts. If you took away their cats they would fill the place with old newspapers or beany babies or just garbage.

    5. Re:Interesting fact by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Or, putting it in more neutral terms, parasites which were influencing rats in the general direction of such behaviors left more descendants.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    6. Re:Interesting fact by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Careful what you wish for. All that rat wanted was a little pussy...

    7. Re:Interesting fact by pookemon · · Score: 1

      And in Humans the parasite travels to the brain. Where it begins feeding on Neuron's, diminishing the mental capacity of the host - until they reach a point where they are interested in Soccer and the world cup. Hence the Causation and Correlation in this study.

      Of course, being from Australia, I'd have to say I'm surprised by the level of infection here in Oz. Not so much how many people are affected, but how far it's progressed in those that are affected. Those that are infected have been so for so long that they thought that Australia would do anything other than get their "asses" (maybe Donkeys get infected from eating rats...) kicked in the first round. In fact the infection is so bad that they then claimed that "Australia could be proud with what the Socceroos achieved" (proud at getting thumped... Riiiight).

      --
      dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
    8. Re:Interesting fact by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Cheesing.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    9. Re:Interesting fact by Tetsujin · · Score: 1

      Cheesing.

      You never really get that good a look at her naked tits, though.

      --
      Bow-ties are cool.
  13. Re:Correlation is not causation: Oblig. XKCD by levell · · Score: 1

    I think this XKCD cartoon about correlation vs. causation is one of my favourite.

    --
    Struggling to find a day everyone can make? WhenShallWe.com
  14. This is a "back of the envelope" type study. by johnny+cashed · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The author does not actually have any test data on the soccer players. He just used the rates of parasite infections in the countries competing and correlates them with World Cup wins. A proper study would test the players themselves. This was not done. Some big assumptions are made instead.

    1. Re:This is a "back of the envelope" type study. by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      I really doubt toxoplasma infection would help the *players* at all. One of the effects of infection is slower reaction time, not something that would improve athletic performance.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasmosis#Behavioral_changes

  15. Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by socz · · Score: 0
    So, the good news is that the U.S. has like a 13% infection rate. The bad news is that apparently,

    Evidence even suggests that motorcyclists are more likely to have Toxo. Something like a James Dean effect. Generally, males with Toxo are more aggressive and less inhibited. "

    http://www.motorcyclenews.com/MCN/News/newsresults/General-news/2010/June/jun0810-The-pill-that-could-cure-you-of-motorcycling/

    So, did I ever mention I'm a biker? hahaha

    --
    My abilities are only limited by my imagination
    1. Re:Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      And women with this parasite are supposedly more promiscuous.

    2. Re:Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by linzeal · · Score: 1

      Nothing quite like sleeping with the crazy cat lady, I would imagine, cough.

    3. Re:Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      And women with this parasite are supposedly more promiscuous.

      Hmmm. Is this parasite available in pill form?

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    4. Re:Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      Bad news, one of the other suspected side effects of toxo in human women is also an increase in intelligence.

    5. Re:Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by PPH · · Score: 1

      Which is why all the cat ladies are alone. The cats of the women carrying the parasite have a lower survival rate.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:Will my insurance cover this toxo bug? by c6gunner · · Score: 1

      Bad news, one of the other suspected side effects of toxo in human women is also an increase in intelligence.

      So ... they'll be able to cook tastier food? How is this a bad thing?

  16. Besides, statistics are wrong by mangu · · Score: 1

    Even the correlation is not absolute here.

    TFA mentions that Korea has the lowest infection rate in the world. Both Koreas qualified for this Workd Cup, while some 170+ other countries didn't.

    TFA also mentions Ghana has the highest infection rate. They are already out of this Cup, have never won any.

    1. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Well great... you just proved one thing. If you aren't severely infected with Toxo, they will agree with you. If they are severely infected, they will agree with the main drive of the story.

      If it weren't for the fact that this particular parasite has existed for thousands and thousands of years, I would think it was some sort of government conspiracy. That Toxo-parasite scares the crap out of me frankly. Think about it -- it has the potential to make smart people into stupid people and stupid people into really frikken crazy people. Since I learned about it, you can't get me near a cat for any amount of time. I already feel like I'm losing IQ points every day -- I don't need it accelerated.

      Interestingly enough, I had forwarded some information on the parasite to a friend who was getting cats (yes, cats plural) and he responded "you can also get cancer from breathing!" I didn't even attempt to go into why that was a ridiculous response, but I happen to know he is part of a couple that plans to have children eventually. I'm guessing he didn't even read what I sent him... This is how mass stupidity happens. When people want something enough, they will ignore any and all facts in pursuit of it. This is why SPAM emails work. This is why people continue to smoke cigarettes regardless of how much truth they hear about how bad and utterly useless it is. (Yeah, call me troll or flamebait or whatever, but if you are a smoker, and a LOT of you are, you're just a dumb shit for wasting your money and your health on it. Seriously. "It's an addiction!" Be stronger than the addiction dumbass!)

      I know I'm no picture of health. But if something I am doing is taxing my health AND costing me a lot of money? You bet I'm inclined to quit. What the hell is wrong with people who can't think that way for themselves?

    2. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      You had better be careful with those IQ points, does not seem you have many to spare.

      Some people have the cash to waste and don't care. I stopped smoking years ago, but you are still a douchebag. I am 100% sure my cat is smarter than you.

    3. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Your cat has toxo and is controlling your mind with it. It's "okay" to not care about yourself... but most people see that as a sign of a mental problem in the classical sense of the word. It's anyone's right to not care about themselves, true. But isn't it also a rather large problem that has a rather large impact on society at large? I think the results are self-evident and quite demonstrable.

    4. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Even the correlation is not absolute here.

      "A is positively correlated with B" does not mean the same thing as "if A, then B." So griping that the correlation isn't "absolute" is kind of silly.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      He probably is.

      Considering that smokers pay in taxes far more than they cost society, I disagree that they have a negative impact on society.

      Either way I believe people should be free to ingest whatever they like.

    6. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Can I "catch" toxoplasmosis from my cat?

      Because cats only shed the organism for a few days in their entire life, the chance of human exposure is small. Owning a cat does not mean you will be infected with the disease. It is unlikely that you would be exposed to the parasite by touching an infected cat, because cats usually do not carry the parasite on their fur. It is also unlikely that you can become infected through cat bites or scratches. In addition, cats kept indoors that do not hunt prey or are not fed raw meat are not likely to be infected with T. gondii.

      In the United States, people are much more likely to become infected through eating raw meat and unwashed fruits and vegetables than from handling cat feces.

      I completely understand your friend's position. Cats are, in my opinion, one of the biggest joys in life and considering the low probabilities of catching toxo from it, his position is fully justified.

    7. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by bigstrat2003 · · Score: 1

      This is why people continue to smoke cigarettes regardless of how much truth they hear about how bad and utterly useless it is. (Yeah, call me troll or flamebait or whatever, but if you are a smoker, and a LOT of you are, you're just a dumb shit for wasting your money and your health on it. Seriously. "It's an addiction!" Be stronger than the addiction dumbass!)

      This is bullshit. Smoking can be (although isn't always) as simple as the smoker deciding "I enjoy smoking enough that the extra quality of life I get is worth the trade-off in money and longevity." Sure, I don't agree, but it's not like they are completely without any sort of rational thought on the subject, as you are portraying them.

      --
      "16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
    8. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Chances of infection via cats are really minuscule; we do big deal of it because when it happens at the wrong time to a wrong person (pregnant woman; think of the children!) the results catch attention.

      Overall, cats most likely should be thanked by great contribution to our civilization - for a few thousand years they guard our supplies.

      BTW, up to a certain point (not exceeding certain period of smoking / quiting quickly enough - basically mid-20's) the rates of illnesses associated with smoking are practically identical for non)never)-smokers and (ex)smokers.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    9. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by XSpud · · Score: 3, Funny

      Chances of infection via cats are really minuscule; we do big deal of it because when it happens at the wrong time to a wrong person (pregnant woman; think of the children!) the results catch attention.

      Overall, cats most likely should be thanked by great contribution to our civilization - for a few thousand years they guard our supplies.

      BTW, up to a certain point (not exceeding certain period of smoking / quiting quickly enough - basically mid-20's) the rates of illnesses associated with smoking are practically identical for non)never)-smokers and (ex)smokers.

      This isn't clear to me - are you saying we should, or shouldn't be worried about sharing a joint with a cat?

    10. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by Cimexus · · Score: 1

      Some things to consider:

      - If you are living in a Western developed country, you have far, far, far, far more chance of getting toxo from eating a bit of fruit or some vegetables that you didn't wash well enough. Or from that nice medium rare hamburger you had a few years ago. Owning a cat is a very minor risk by comparison. Especially if that cat is essentially an indoor/house cat.

      - This parasite is as common as mud. Look around an average room and a couple of people will likely have it. Hell there's a decent chance you already have it (rates in most developed countries are still upwards of 10% ... I believe it's 12% for the US). Avoiding it completely would be nigh on impossible. It's essentially down to luck (where you live, and what you eat or have ever eaten).

      - But it's harmless to anyone with a healthy immune system. The deactivated cysts will persist in muscle and brain tissue but the link between them and behavioural changes is weak (and even if real, very slight). Depending on your personality before you got it, it may even provide a 'beneficial' behavioural trait (e.g. if it slightly increases agression, that could be good for someone that's naturally very shy and non-assertive)

    11. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Ingest yes, but smoking is an extremely inefficient method of ingesting anything...

      The majority of it goes up in the air, where it is inhaled by people nearby wether they want to or not. Shouldn't people also be free to choose *not* to ingest something?

      In countries with nationalized healthcare, does the tax revenue from smoking (and separately from alcohol for that matter) cover the cost of the healthcare required to deal with the results? Not to mention the cost of cleaning up the mess smokers leave (the streets are covered in the filters, most smokers simply toss them aside once finished) and all the instances of fire being caused by smoking.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    12. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Most smokers i encounter don't think like that, they try very hard to justify that it's not really very damaging or deny that its harmful at all...
      They also try to claim that people around them won't be affected by the fumes, for instance i know someone who stands by a window to smoke to give the impression that hes thinking about the other non smokers around him, yet he completely refuses to accept that a large amount of that smoke actually gets blown back inside.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    13. Re:Besides, statistics are wrong by instagib · · Score: 1

      Considering that smokers pay in taxes far more than they cost society

      Citation needed, calling BS, see thread's title.

  17. Come on, all together now! by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    Let's sing the "Correlation is not causation" song!

  18. Only Correlated With World Cup Success in CATS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In humans, the infection causes pundits to see patterns everywhere much like that guy from A Beautiful Mind, who was eaten by a cat if I recall correctly.

  19. Godwin's by tirnacopu · · Score: 1

    Both the article and the summary state state such absurd and horrific suppositions, an association with the presumed arian supremacy is the first thought and actually the last as I dismissed this story and will try to forget it.

  20. Toxo Parasite Implies Soccer Prowess? Doubtful by Ellie+K · · Score: 1
    I want to know what the incidence rate of infection amongst the players themselves actually is. Now the article did posit this, which is unlikely but possibly a behavioral influence, even if the actual players are not infected:

    "it might be foolish to assume that the players have the same rate of infection as their countrymen ... On the other hand, having more Toxo-infected people around you at a young age might help your development as a player. Second, some studies have shown that those infected with Toxo have slower reaction times on certain tests than matched controls"

    The last part clinches it for me. Toxo infection does NOT confer enhanced motor skills or athletic ability. Quite the contrary. Perhaps the preceding sentence is an influence, but that isn't easy to determine. And toxoplasmosis is awful. My best friend cauaght it from her parakeet, or maybe the cat, when she was 11 years old, and she was yellow and jaundicy and sickly for years, even with treatment. The CDC http://www.cdc.gov/toxoplasmosis/ comments that it is the 3rd highest cause of food-related deaths in the US.

    --
    tempus fugit
    1. Re:Toxo Parasite Implies Soccer Prowess? Doubtful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, these populations where toxo infections are high and may be hampering physical ability could be responding by breeding for better physical ability. Which, when infected, leaves them as able as average in other populations and when uninfected, as is more likely when you're a highly paid professional athlete, leaves you with a physical advantage.

      Such a hypothesis could be fairly easily tested. Although, not by me.

    2. Re:Toxo Parasite Implies Soccer Prowess? Doubtful by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Not the parakeet you anti-bird racist, friend of cats! Stop spreading FUD! (just kidding)
      Cats are more likely to carry it, and I thought it was found on mammals...the article says so, so maybe I am not mistaken here.

    3. Re:Toxo Parasite Implies Soccer Prowess? Doubtful by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Could have been something she ate too. If you clean the litter box daily it is unlikely you would catch it as the feces needs to be several days old for transmission to occur.

    4. Re:Toxo Parasite Implies Soccer Prowess? Doubtful by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      Most soccer players in poor countries used cats instead of soccer balls when they were children.

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    5. Re:Toxo Parasite Implies Soccer Prowess? Doubtful by Ellie+K · · Score: 1

      I suppose it could've been something she ate. I can't imagine she'd be going through the litter box if she didn't have to. (Although I continue to be surprised at how many people don't do daily litter box cleanings.)

      Really, really shouldn't say this but... do you think the Human Centipede was vulnerable to toxoplasmosis? Better question: Why haven't I seen any Slashdot posts on that abomination of a movie yet? Y'all must be way too mature of a crowd for such nonsense. I didn't see the movie myself, only heard Roger Ebert refusing to rate it!

      --
      tempus fugit
  21. Cause and effect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Countries with greater incidence of this parasitic infection in their populations tend to win more World Cups than those without.

    Countries where children grow up diving into the turf and rolling around faking injuries tend to have more children with Toxo.

  22. Health Care by Nugoo · · Score: 1

    More evidence that Canada has better health care than the US!

    --
    I explicitly release the above into the public domain.
  23. Playing football gives you toxo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the chance that people catch toxo from practicing football? Ball rolls in cat-feces; the players touch the ball.....

  24. Goa'uld swarm in my brain makes me sad by musmax · · Score: 1
    Ever since I read about toxoplasmosis I suspected I might be infected:
    • Brain fog - check
    • Issues with focus and concentration - check
    • Inexplicably irritated by authority, more than can be explained by normal nerd rage - check
    • Generally being a dick - check
    • Frequent keeper of both cats and rats - check
    • To much polishing the rocket - uhm, check
    • Some other shit I can't remember know owning to being distracted by SWAG picks and resident Goa'uld swarm blowing vuvuzelas in my brain.

    Toxoplasmosis negatively affects intelligence and makes you a jock. Assuming I'm right, how do I get cured ?

    1. Re:Goa'uld swarm in my brain makes me sad by u17 · · Score: 1

      Go to Norway and visit their cloning research programme.

  25. what are we waiting for? by sproketboy · · Score: 1

    Let's get infected!

  26. ALL GLORY TO THE TOXO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Toxoplasma gondii, the great (×30) grandfather of Hypnotoad.

    TOXO FOR THE WIN!

  27. Slightly wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Toxoplasma gondii is a really interesting parasite. It has a sexual and an asexual reproductive phase, depending on what it has infected. The sexual phase occurs in cats' stomachs, at which point eggs are released in the cat's feces, where they gestate until something eats them. The asexual phase occurs in just about everything else, where it forms cysts in the muscles and the brain of the host. And that's just how it reproduces... the cysts in the brain do all sorts of crazy stuff to the animals its infected.

    It's contracted by eating catshit containing the eggs, or meat with Toxoplasma cysts. A cat that tracked through its own shit then clawed a rat might pass it on, but probably not.

  28. Oblig Futurama reference by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    Fry: Of all the parasites I've had over the years, these worms are among the... hell, they are the best.

  29. solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    since western countries know that correlation == causation, we should start infecting our players with this parasite for the love of our country.

  30. The Referee disease by PPH · · Score: 1

    Now we just need to find a parasite that causes an inability to referee properly, and we'll have this whole World Cup business all sorted out.

    That would probably be Onchocerciasis.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  31. "increased dissent of authority" by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    Now we know why they go crazy, riot, burn, and pillage when their teams win. Futball fans are craay-zie.

  32. Wouldn't almost any parasite show this correlation by kindbud · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Lots of diseases and parasites that flourish in the less-developed countries have been wiped out (or nearly so) in more-developed countries. There are more less-developed countries in FIFA than there are developed countries. So the correlation should probably hold true for malaria and other parasites, as well as for things like education and poverty.

    --
    Edith Keeler Must Die
  33. infected countries encourage more training by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    because they idolize players, because Toxo scrambles the brains of the population, making it hard for them to understand that soccer is just a game!

  34. I'd like to nominate a tag by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

    How about ohplease or maybe even spareus!

    absolutedrivel would be good too, though I'd rather not see this sort of trast on /. at all. I can dream, can't I?

    --
    If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
  35. Re:Wouldn't almost any parasite show this correlat by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Netherlands is less developed? Germany is less developed?

    Tale a look at the Semis group, Germany, Spain, Netherlands, Uruguay.

    This parasite is quite abundant in the more developed nations.

  36. Unreasonable by Xamusk · · Score: 1

    That doesn't really explain why Ghana has so far won no World Cups.

  37. So does this mean cat pee cocktails... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

    ...for FIFA team training tables?

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  38. midichlorians? by The+Grim+Reefer2 · · Score: 2

    So Lucas didn't even come up with the force on his own, just a silly name for the soccer parasite. ;-)

    1. Re:midichlorians? by thijsh · · Score: 1

      Waves hand - There is no ball... You can go about your business. Move along.

  39. Turkey by Weezul · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't buy the article's conclusions. Ghana has cats? fine. Turkey has mucho cats everywhere! A cat might even shit on your head while you eat in a fancy restaurant in Taksim. All middle eastern countries have oodles of cats, afaik. Yet they suck ass at soccer?

    Germany is a dog country, very few cats here. Brazil doesn't have street cats like Turkey either. etc.

    --
    The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
    1. Re:Turkey by Miseph · · Score: 1

      The correlation isn't with cats, though. It's with human toxo infections. You're grossly oversimplifying the process of disease propagation.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    2. Re:Turkey by sznupi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Germany is a dog country, very few cats here. Brazil doesn't have street cats like Turkey either. etc.

      That is usually a misconception BTW. From a quick search, Germany appears to have almost two times more domestic cats then dogs. Just domestic. When it comes to "stray"/half-wild/etc. animals cats also typically dominate, they are more suited to such life (and people are more likely to leave them alone)

      Cats simply aren't so visible.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    3. Re:Turkey by zill · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Toxoplasmosis is more often transmitted through raw meat than with cats, contrary to popular belief.

    4. Re:Turkey by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 2, Funny

      How about raw cats?

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    5. Re:Turkey by N+Monkey · · Score: 1

      I don't buy the article's conclusions. Ghana has cats? fine. Turkey has mucho cats everywhere! A cat might even shit on your head while you eat in a fancy restaurant in Taksim. All middle eastern countries have oodles of cats, afaik. Yet they suck ass at soccer?

      Germany is a dog country, very few cats here. Brazil doesn't have street cats like Turkey either. etc.

      IIRC, Turkey reached the final 4 places in the last world cup and I think their top domestic teams often do reasonably well in the European Championship (?) league. I don't follow the game enough to know why they didn't qualify for this competition

    6. Re:Turkey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Korea, only old people eat raw cats! (Unfortunately, it hasn't caught on among the young footballers).

    7. Re:Turkey by indi0144 · · Score: 1

      I can has raw cat?

  40. Re:Wouldn't almost any parasite show this correlat by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    Lots of diseases and parasites that flourish in the less-developed countries have been wiped out (or nearly so) in more-developed countries.

    True, though this isn't particularly one of them, since it hasn't been "essentially wiped out" in more developed countries.

    There are more less-developed countries in FIFA than there are developed countries.

    So?

    So the correlation should probably hold true for malaria and other parasites, as well as for things like education and poverty.

    I'm not sure how you make the leap of logic here. Virtually every country in the world is in FIFA, but the ones that tend to win the most World Cups aren't particularly the least developed. In order from most to least, the countries that have won the World Cup at least once are:
    Brazil (5),
    Italy (4),
    Germany (3),
    Argentina (2) and Uruguay (2),
    England (1) and France (1)

    All of them are in the top half in terms of GDP/capita in the world, and the ones in Europe are in the top 15% or so (varies by which ranking you look at; Italy falls a little out of that range in some.)

  41. Is it that bad? Do we need to avoid ads that much? by shovas · · Score: 1

    I'm all for the print link on sites that abuse readers, but if an article is worth reading and discussing, shouldn't we give them a little credit and link to the real article?

    You know, because people do link to print versions so much, most put lots of ads on those too now. I'm surprised this one didn't.

    --
    Selah.ca. Pause, and calmly think on that.
  42. Re:Correlation is not causation (as stated in TFA) by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

    FTFA: "Finally, it's possible—likely, even—that the correlation between Toxo infection and World Cup success is a coincidence, or that it reflects some other common trait among successful soccer nations. Maybe it helps to have raw meat in your diet, and Toxo is just a side effect?"

  43. Correlation is not causation...but in this case it by HiThere · · Score: 1

    Correlation is not causation...but in this case it might be.

    If I remember properly, when mice are infected with this parasite they become more aggressive and less fearful. And more likely to be eaten by a cat.

    When you think about it, if you go back a million years or so being more aggressive would also make a person likely to be eaten by a cat.

    Obviously we should do tests on the athletes to see if they've dosed themselves with toxoplasma in order to win the competition.

    --

    I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  44. Plus the free software is better and more stable by jbeach · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    And it isn't locked into a particular platform. You know, those crazy ideas that are come from those new-fangled fads all the crazy kids are into, with their bell-bottom jeans and their "Yeah yeah yeah".

    --
    The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
  45. Re:Plus the free software is better and more stabl by jbeach · · Score: 1

    Whoops. Wow, was that the wrong article for this comment. Parasites and soccer. Carry on...or should I say carrion?

    --
    The Invisible Hand of the Free Market is what punches workers in the nuts.
  46. Re:Correlation is not causation: Oblig. XKCD by tom17 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Obligatory xkcd.

    Fixed that for you.
    Don't try and be all karma-whory, just post the damn XKCD link :)

  47. Just a... excuse by imerso · · Score: 2, Funny

    Oh, I see now... some of you needed to find an excuse for not... winning the World Cup. Riiiight...

  48. It seems to me.. by Buddy027 · · Score: 1

    "The overall goal of the parasite is to end up in a feline stomach," If that's the case then you'd expect populations which tend to own more cats (or more Ferrel cats) would have a higher percent. It also goes to reason that if you have more money you are more likely to have a pet (at least within the US) so we have more then just this isolated percent, we have money, percent of population owning cats, and raito of wild cats to people.

  49. increased dissent of authority by countertrolling · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, that must mean the French infection rate is 105%

    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  50. I have found the Gene for Acting by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    It's highly correlated with being from Ghana.

    Also, very very strong correlation between being male and winning the World Cup. Compared to being female.

    Wonder why that is?

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  51. too much polishing the rocket? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, if you just masterbated immediately then you wouldn't persuade yourself to buy into all the sex-toy hype to manipulate the prostate gland which could increase the waste of time from 15 minutes to 4 hours. At least, I read "polishing the rocket" meaning you are a dildo fanatic. If you are horny, just rub four off as soon as possible or you will build a career in stimulating your genitals. Trust me, Anonymous, because I know...

  52. They already found the disease that affects refs by rcamans · · Score: 1

    It's called blindness...

    --
    wake up and hold your nose
  53. No ??? Step!!! by jd2112 · · Score: 1

    1> Enroll child in soccer league.
    2> Get child a cat. Make child clean the litter box.
    3> Child becomes soccer phenom.
    4> PROFIT!!!!

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  54. Did not see horizontal evolution mentioned by nu1x · · Score: 1

    This pretty much THE case (esp. this cat bacteria which is very famous and mentioned multiple times all over the place) of a very interesting semi-symbiotic phenomena (host more aggressive ? more manly ? drawbacks also ? intriguing).

    Also, what always, kinda, shocks me is that, how no sufficient effort exist to really go in-depth about the bacterial influences on populations, and esp. on human population.

    I really think some bacteria are akin to hive-existence, having their agenda, methods, and the means to implement them. They make up an appreciable portion of biosphere and should be studied with much greater vigor.

    Seeing as some bacteria influece our perceptions of the world directly by manufactoring certain neurotransmitters, etc ?

    --
    I have nothing to lose but my bindings.
  55. I have a theory... by Petersko · · Score: 1

    Maybe the parasite causes sufferers to hallucinate, and so they perceive the sport as vastly more interesting than it really is.

    I mean, there's got to be a reason why the world goes bonkers over this dull, mindnumbing event, right?

    On the rare occasion I watch this sport I think to myself, "This is what it must feel like to not give a crap about hockey."

    Maybe it's because I'm not interested in working out centuries-old military conflicts and the grudges of my ancestors by tossing a bottle into the face of an oppsing fan?

    1. Re:I have a theory... by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

      that is because you live in a country which bans online gaming.

      Go place a bet like most of the Star Wars geeks, preferably over US$1000 , and you will see the game becomes extremely exciting.

    2. Re:I have a theory... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > On the rare occasion I watch this sport I think to myself, "This is what it
      > must feel like to not give a crap about hockey."

      It is. I know, because I feel exactly the same way about soccer and hockey (and all other professional team sports).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:I have a theory... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > that is because you live in a country which bans online gaming.

      Do you seriously believe that said ban prevents betting?

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  56. Re:Is it that bad? Do we need to avoid ads that mu by masterwit · · Score: 1

    It is nice to the websites in which we are linking (the Slashdot effect can be taxing), and not every user views Slashdot from a computer or high-speed internet connection, [insert joke here about portable devices].

    --
    We should start a new Slashdot and return control to the geeks. It actually wouldn't be that hard to get some users to
  57. great physique? by yyxx · · Score: 1

    Does it also give me a world class soccer player's physique?

  58. Correlation is NOT causation by logistic · · Score: 1

    How is this science? A slate article siting the economist?

    This is a classic example of potentially the ecologic fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_fallacy) In brief you have aggregate exposure data and aggregate data about the population and correlate them. From this data you don't have any idea if the exposed people are affected by the condition understudy.
    (Anyone here have toxo serologies on the world cup teams?) Clearly there are no other differences between these countries besides their rate of toxo infection.:) See confounding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding).

    All this stuff about toxo changing the development of society is entertaining speculation but no data is presented here to make it more than that. There are lot's more plausible pathogens for this (eg tuberculosis, malaria, HIV )

    Population level correlations are best used for hypothesis generation, they are not reliable tests of same in most circumstances.

  59. Toxoplasma gondii by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Causes women to be promiscuous, and men to become irritable and stupid.

    Given the non-discriminating nature of promiscuity, the end result is the entire human race will become stupid, irritable, and fucked. But what's new?

    Or else the women will tend to be promiscuous with other women, which means that the population will drop, men will be bread out of the race, and women will start parthenogenating all over the place, leading to an entire planet of horny women.. wait.. it's an alien plot! We're being bred for a purpose..

  60. bullpucky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Certainly, there are caveats."

    RTFA and you'll see there's no real correlation. Good attention getter, that's all.

    Hey, Slashdot, Thanks for all the fish!

  61. Wealth causes cats and winning by Myopic · · Score: 1

    Interesting. My inference is that wealthy countries can both afford more cats, and also fund better soccer (cough football cough) teams. What little I know about toxo wouldn't support a direct A -> B causal relationship.

    1. Re:Wealth causes cats and winning by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      well that's a strange inference considering Ghana is a poor country and Korea is a rich one. Maybe a brain parasite led you to that little gem.

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    2. Re:Wealth causes cats and winning by Myopic · · Score: 1

      Mmmm hmmm. Well I haven't run a regression on all the countries yet. Have you? Any valid data will have outliers.

  62. you mean the European Cup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    ...which is the prize for the winners of the Uefa Champions League

    The Uefa Cup is the legacy name for the Europa League.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UEFA_Champions_League

  63. Correlation vs causation by Stormtrooper42 · · Score: 1

    Since the 19th century, the number of pirates (as in, maritime piracy) kept decreasing. The global temperature kept increasing. Therefore, according to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the decrease in the number of pirates causes global warming. (+ Somalia has the highest number of Pirates AND the lowest Carbon emissions.)

  64. simple answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how about the simple answer that in these countries with lower hygiene etc,
    you have people more likely to really strive to win through sports etc.
    as opposed to rich white people who don't really try unless they're being paid heaps.

  65. Nonsense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the second most successful world cup nation in history (Italy) has a 'relatively average rate of infection' of 33%. So this stands up how?

  66. Re:Wouldn't almost any parasite show this correlat by MemoryDragon · · Score: 1

    I want to excuse Germany here, they definitely do not have a higher toxoplasmosis infection rate, they just are like that...

  67. Vuvuzela by heson · · Score: 1

    The obvious correlation is that the other teams got disturbed by the vuvuzelas and played badly. (I havn't seen more than a few minutes, thats all the vuvuzela music I can take)

  68. So my kitten... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Infected me with Las Plagas?

  69. selective dataset by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the TFA: "If we set aside the qualifying rounds" ---> "Get rid of the data that doesn't fit our wanted conclusions and then we're set."

  70. Hum, yeah by Drakkenmensch · · Score: 1

    You're thinking of midichlorians here.

  71. Sexy parasite by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    T.gondii has a better impact on humans:
    http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/parasite-makes-men-dumb-women-sexy/2006/12/26/1166895290973.html

    "A common parasite can increase a women's attractiveness to the opposite sex but also make men more stupid, an Australian researcher says.

    About 40 per cent of the world's population is infected with Toxoplasma gondii, including about eight million Australians.

    Human infection generally occurs when people eat raw or undercooked meat that has cysts containing the parasite, or accidentally ingest some of the parasite's eggs excreted by an infected cat.

    The parasite is known to be dangerous to pregnant women as it can cause disability or abortion of the unborn child, and can also kill people whose immune systems are weakened.

    Until recently it was thought to be an insignificant disease in healthy people, Sydney University of Technology infectious disease researcher Nicky Boulter said, but new research has revealed its mind-altering properties.

    "Interestingly, the effect of infection is different between men and women," Dr Boulter writes in the latest issue of Australasian Science magazine.

    "Infected men have lower IQs, achieve a lower level of education and have shorter attention spans. They are also more likely to break rules and take risks, be more independent, more anti-social, suspicious, jealous and morose, and are deemed less attractive to women.

    "On the other hand, infected women tend to be more outgoing, friendly, more promiscuous, and are considered more attractive to men compared with non-infected controls.

    "In short, it can make men behave like alley cats and women behave like sex kittens""

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Sexy parasite by ^_^x · · Score: 1

      Even in rodents that may be eaten by cats, it seems that when it affects a creature's brain, it makes them less averse to taking risks. In humans it can be a subtle difference, but I can see how it might improve someone's game at many sports.

  72. According to that logic... by captainpanic · · Score: 1

    according to that logic, the Chinese should have a team of 500 people, while the Dutch for example would only have 5 guys on the field.

    Or the Chinese would have 100 times as many teams playing for the world cup.

    In Asia, they just have very large countries. But each country only sends 1 team. Europe has many small countries. The qualifications generally are in leagues of 5-6 countries, and one or two go through to the world cup.

    In many other sports (athletics at the Olympics) it works the normal way, and big countries have more people competing.

  73. Which country is that? by Petersko · · Score: 1

    "that is because you live in a country which bans online gaming... Go place a bet like most of the Star Wars geeks, preferably over US$1000 , and you will see the game becomes extremely exciting."

    While I'm pretty sure that's not true (about banned online gaming), and while I'm not a Star Wars geek, your point only reinforces mine - you have to do SOMETHING (like make large wagers) to make watching football worthwhile. In and of itself, it's unbelievably boring.

  74. Yes, Soccer Success Is For Pussies by BigBlueOx · · Score: 1

    I mean. The ball's a soft inflated thing instead of 9 - 10 pounds of hard rubber, the players play on nice soft grass instead of unforgiving stone and neither winner nor loser get sacrificed except in Colombia.

    In MY day we played a MAN'S game. We ensured a good pulque supply by spilling the arterial red blood of our ballplayers upon the sacred ritual stones. You darn kids today with your iPhones and your pussy games and your "music". Get off my lawn.

  75. Simple Explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't the correlation best explained by the fact that in countries better at football, kids tend to spend more time outdoor (sometimes kicking ball) and thus are more exposed to Toxo infection?

  76. Re:Wouldn't almost any parasite show this correlat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually isn't the article implying that the players have the parasite? Wouldn't that be easy to test for? Who cares about the rest of the population? They're not on the field.

  77. Motorbike Accidents by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    I forget where I saw it (possibly on slashdot) but I read an article that there is some evidence that suggests that Toxo makes Humans more "reckless", and that the percentage of people involved in motorcycle accidents that have Toxo is way above the norm.

  78. The freedom bug? Deep-fried? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... ranging from increased testosterone to increased dissent of authority ...

    So. A freedom bug, eh? But, with that sort of spectrum, shouldn't they be too overwhelmed in in fight clubs, continual riots, and biker's gangs, to have time for collaborative, empathic, attentive, parallel, continuous, multicyclic, dynamic sports like soccer? Maybe it's the antibodies, then?

    And what about the steamy relation between dictatorships and soccer? Compared with the diametrically opposite slow axfixiating effect of "marketing commodity" commercialism?

  79. hey dumbass by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

    what part of "WORLD" don't you understand? Someone talks about something in general, and you respond with something only about the US? By your logic, English is the most spoken language in the world, and Christianity is the largest religion. Haha!

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    1. Re:hey dumbass by Neoprofin · · Score: 1

      "In the US it is the most popular recreational sport for both male & female competitors."

      "No it isn't"

      Perhaps your Karma is bad because you're illiterate.