Sorry for the silence…

But there comes a point when you realize..  Ragen is, above all, delusional. And not smart.  In fact, kind of stupid.

And so are the people that follow her.

So, what am I going to do?  Rip apart every one of her stupid posts?

It’s been done a thousand times. Shoddy science backed by links to her own blog?  You can’t fight stupidity.  Delusion is just that – delusion.  And weirdly enough, delusion trumps science.

Will update sporadically when she fails to do the Austin Half IM (which she still hasn’t signed up for) and the rest of her ‘elite athlete’ shit.

But Ragen is nothing but a failure.  One big huge fat failure.  You can’t dispute that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

5 thoughts on “Sorry for the silence…

  1. I hope you’ll continue to blog so you maintain your Google ranking. Remember Ragen cackling with glee when that fat hate Tumblr announced they wouldn’t be posting about her anymore because they thought she was mentally ill? It’s important for people to know who she really is when they deal with her and her dangerous bullshit.

  2. Thought you might appreciate some of the content I’ve put on Reddit previously.

    If the editing works to keep formatted links, I got pissed of with Ragen’s shit use of stats, so wrote this:

    The bit that annoyed me was [this](http://imgur.com/Nh6S6Vb). I knew Ragen would bullshit on this one, so I did the digging.

    From Googling the key part, I found the stats in various places, but [here](http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/AAP-Clinical-Report-Childrens-Eating-Disorders-on-the-Rise.aspx?nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token) is the text Ragen cheerfully glanced over and quoted. So instead of looking at the reported, I dug out the report. [This](http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb70.pdf) is the original PDF with the data in it. The headline grabbing 119% is on pages 1 and 3, but page 7 has the actual breakdown of numbers which is the crucial bit. [This](http://imgur.com/yPgc5hi) is the reference table showing the breakdown of numbers. The highlight is that in 1999/2000, under 12’s made up 2% of total admissions, raising to 4% in 05/06. But numbers wise, this is 520 to 1,139 *nationally.* As part of the US total population, this is 520 patients in 282 million (or 0.0000018% of the population). To get a little idea of context, [I found a 2013 gun crime paper](http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1215606) which states;

    > “In 2010, gun-related injuries accounted for 6570 deaths of children and young people (1 to 24 years of age). That includes 7 deaths per day among people 1 to 19 years of age. Gun injuries cause twice as many deaths as cancer, 5 times as many as heart disease, and 15 times as many as infections.”

    Although around 1,000 hospitalisation for under 12’s due to ED’s is unwelcome, it puts the figure into perspective. Especially as this is *hospitilisations,* not deaths. Hopefully many of these hospital admissions come out positive and that these children became normal, balanced and functional members of society. On the data table, inpatient death actually improves from 0.7% to 0.6% taking into account all age groups showing that even with an increasing inpatient number, mortality is dropping so hospitilisation is doing something to improve their life. Although not reported, an extremely low number of under 12’s die from their eating disorder in the time covered. Unfortunately, 6500 gun deaths in children has only one outcome.

    For the number of ED in under 12’s, this is little more than doubling in numbers, but doesn’t take into account *why* they doubled.

    * In the time period, was under 12 child care and health provisions primarily focused on care in the community and/or outreach/outpatients and brought into a hospital setting with policy change?

    * Has the identification of at risk children improved?

    * Have some of the taboo’s about reporting been brought down and parent are now more willing to come forward?

    Is this actually a good thing because it shows children are now more willing to look for help? 119% means nothing when Ragen uses it.

    As a bonus, to contradict Ragen’s last sentence (“15% increase…….in all ages across the same time period”) as the original report states;

    > Hospitalizations involving eating disorders for children under age 12 increased 119% from 1999−2000 to 2005−2006. **All the other age groups in 2005−2006 had more hospital stays comparing to 1999−2000 except for the age group 30−45. While eating disorder-related hospital stays decreased 3 percent for patients aged 30−45,** the hospital stays for patients aged 12−19 and for patients aged 19−30 increased 18 percent and 19 percent, respectively. A 48 percent increase of eating disorder-related hospital stays occurred for patients aged 45−65, and a 24 percent increase occurred for the elderly.

    Just shows using the source text is more important than the rehashed secondary or tertiary source.

  3. The bit that annoyed me was [this](http://imgur.com/Nh6S6Vb). I knew Ragen would bullshit on this one, so I did the digging.

    From Googling the key part, I found the stats in various places, but [here](http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/AAP-Clinical-Report-Childrens-Eating-Disorders-on-the-Rise.aspx?nfstatus=401&nftoken=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000&nfstatusdescription=ERROR%3a+No+local+token) is the text Ragen cheerfully glanced over and quoted. So instead of looking at the reported, I dug out the report. [This](http://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb70.pdf) is the original PDF with the data in it. The headline grabbing 119% is on pages 1 and 3, but page 7 has the actual breakdown of numbers which is the crucial bit. [This](http://imgur.com/yPgc5hi) is the reference table showing the breakdown of numbers. The highlight is that in 1999/2000, under 12’s made up 2% of total admissions, raising to 4% in 05/06. But numbers wise, this is 520 to 1,139 *nationally.* As part of the US total population, this is 520 patients in 282 million (or 0.0000018% of the population). To get a little idea of context, [I found a 2013 gun crime paper](http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1215606) which states;

    > “In 2010, gun-related injuries accounted for 6570 deaths of children and young people (1 to 24 years of age). That includes 7 deaths per day among people 1 to 19 years of age. Gun injuries cause twice as many deaths as cancer, 5 times as many as heart disease, and 15 times as many as infections.”

    Although around 1,000 hospitalisation for under 12’s due to ED’s is unwelcome, it puts the figure into perspective. Especially as this is *hospitilisations,* not deaths. Hopefully many of these hospital admissions come out positive and that these children became normal, balanced and functional members of society. On the data table, inpatient death actually improves from 0.7% to 0.6% taking into account all age groups showing that even with an increasing inpatient number, mortality is dropping so hospitilisation is doing something to improve their life. Although not reported, an extremely low number of under 12’s die from their eating disorder in the time covered. Unfortunately, 6500 gun deaths in children has only one outcome.

    For the number of ED in under 12’s, this is little more than doubling in numbers, but doesn’t take into account *why* they doubled.

    * In the time period, was under 12 child care and health provisions primarily focused on care in the community and/or outreach/outpatients and brought into a hospital setting with policy change?

    * Has the identification of at risk children improved?

    * Have some of the taboo’s about reporting been brought down and parent are now more willing to come forward?

    Is this actually a good thing because it shows children are now more willing to look for help? 119% means nothing when Ragen uses it.

    As a bonus, to contradict Ragen’s last sentence (“15% increase…….in all ages across the same time period”) as the original report states;

    > Hospitalizations involving eating disorders for children under age 12 increased 119% from 1999−2000 to 2005−2006. **All the other age groups in 2005−2006 had more hospital stays comparing to 1999−2000 except for the age group 30−45. While eating disorder-related hospital stays decreased 3 percent for patients aged 30−45,** the hospital stays for patients aged 12−19 and for patients aged 19−30 increased 18 percent and 19 percent, respectively. A 48 percent increase of eating disorder-related hospital stays occurred for patients aged 45−65, and a 24 percent increase occurred for the elderly.

    Just shows using the source text is more important than the rehashed secondary or tertiary source.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s