about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,779 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is GMO use in cotton and the second variable is Asthma attacks in American children.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2019, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As GMO use in cotton decreased, so did the size of the cotton candy bushes, which in turn led to fewer children consuming oversized cotton candy, thus reducing the risk of asthma attacks from sugar overload. Remember, moderation is key, even in the whimsical world of sugary confections!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a serene countryside with a vast field of non-GMO cotton swaying gently in the wind. In the foreground, depict a group of happy children playing freely, their joyful laughter echoing through the air. The absence of GMO cotton has led to a noticeable decrease in dust and allergens, creating a clean and fresh atmosphere. The children breathe easily, their lungs free from the "genetically modified obstacle," as they enjoy the pure, unpolluted air. Emphasize the contrast between the pure, natural surroundings and the carefree happiness of the children. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: a funny image macro a Polaroid photo Oragami Magic realism Cute cartoon
ChatGPT: a funny image macro

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children, in the following situation: Huge relief for tiny lungs! Decrease in GMO cotton caused asthma attacks to drop. With less GMO cotton, there's less "puff-puff" in the air. Kids can breathe easy, as there's no longer a "genetically modified obstacle" to their lung health. Let's give a round of applause for this "a-maize-ing" development!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a serene countryside, a vast field of non-GMO cotton sways gently in the wind. Nearby, a group of happy children are playing freely, their joyful laughter echoing through the air. The absence of GMO cotton has led to a noticeable decrease in dust and allergens, creating a clean and fresh atmosphere. The children breathe easily, their lungs free from the "genetically modified obstacle," as they enjoy the pure, unpolluted air.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a funny image macro ] and depicting this scene: In a serene countryside, a vast field of non-GMO cotton sways gently in the wind. Nearby, a group of happy children are playing freely, their joyful laughter echoing through the air. The absence of GMO cotton has led to a noticeable decrease in dust and allergens, creating a clean and fresh atmosphere. The children breathe easily, their lungs free from the "genetically modified obstacle," as they enjoy the pure, unpolluted air. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a serene countryside with a vast field of non-GMO cotton swaying gently in the wind. In the foreground, depict a group of happy children playing freely, their joyful laughter echoing through the air. The absence of GMO cotton has led to a noticeable decrease in dust and allergens, creating a clean and fresh atmosphere. The children breathe easily, their lungs free from the "genetically modified obstacle," as they enjoy the pure, unpolluted air. Emphasize the contrast between the pure, natural surroundings and the carefree happiness of the children.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in GMO use in cotton caused Asthma attacks in American children to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children

Journal of Genetic Medicine and Environmental Health

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from USDA and National Center for Health Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2019.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As a society, we are constantly sowing the seeds of progress and innovation, particularly in the realm of agriculture. One such advancement that has sparked both fascination and controversy is the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crop cultivation. While the efficacy of GMOs in enhancing crop yield and resilience has been a subject of fervent debate, the potential ramifications of these genetic manipulations on human health have also garnered significant attention.

In this vein, our research endeavors to unearth the curious correlation between the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. While some may dismiss this connection as a mere flight of fancy, our statistical analyses have revealed a surprisingly robust relationship that should not be brushed off lightly.

The astute reader may ponder: "What do genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma have in common?" We humbly invite you to abandon preconceived notions and embark on this whimsical journey with us, where the unexpected connections between seemingly disparate entities will unfold before your very eyes.

Drawing upon a decade's worth of data from the USDA and the National Center for Health Statistics, we meticulously plowed through the numbers to discern whether there exists a discernible link. Our findings, sprinkled with amusing anecdotes and statistical revelations, promise to provide a breath of fresh air to the discourse on both GMOs and childhood respiratory health.

In the following sections, we will delve into the intricacies of GMO cultivation, dissect the physiological mechanisms underlying asthma attacks, and immerse ourselves in the statistical rabbit hole to uncover the compelling story that lies beneath. So strap on your statistical goggles and prepare for a blooming adventure, where the data speaks volumes and the puns are as abundant as cotton fields in summertime.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As a society, we are constantly sowing the seeds of progress and innovation, particularly in the realm of agriculture. One such advancement that has sparked both fascination and controversy is the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crop cultivation. While the efficacy of GMOs in enhancing crop yield and resilience has been a subject of fervent debate, the potential ramifications of these genetic manipulations on human health have also garnered significant attention.
In this vein, our research endeavors to unearth the curious correlation between the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. While some may dismiss this connection as a mere flight of fancy, our statistical analyses have revealed a surprisingly robust relationship that should not be brushed off lightly.
The astute reader may ponder: "What do genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma have in common?" We humbly invite you to abandon preconceived notions and embark on this whimsical journey with us, where the unexpected connections between seemingly disparate entities will unfold before your very eyes.
Drawing upon a decade's worth of data from the USDA and the National Center for Health Statistics, we meticulously plowed through the numbers to discern whether there exists a discernible link. Our findings, sprinkled with amusing anecdotes and statistical revelations, promise to provide a breath of fresh air to the discourse on both GMOs and childhood respiratory health.
In the following sections, we will delve into the intricacies of GMO cultivation, dissect the physiological mechanisms underlying asthma attacks, and immerse ourselves in the statistical rabbit hole to uncover the compelling story that lies beneath. So strap on your statistical goggles and prepare for a blooming adventure, where the data speaks volumes and the puns are as abundant as cotton fields in summertime.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith (2015) explores the impact of genetically modified cotton on agricultural yields, focusing on the potential benefits and drawbacks of incorporating GMO technology into cotton cultivation. Meanwhile, Doe and Jones (2018) investigate the prevalence of childhood asthma in the United States, analyzing demographic and environmental factors that may contribute to the onset of respiratory conditions. As we wade through these scholarly works, we are reminded of the complexities inherent in both the agricultural and public health spheres. However, could these seemingly unrelated realms converge in an unexpected and, dare we say, whimsical manner?

Transitioning from the world of academia to the realm of non-fiction literature, "Seeds of Controversy: The Hidden Story of Genetic Engineering" by Jane Goodall provides a thought-provoking exploration of the ethical and ecological implications of genetically modified organisms, including their potential effects on human health. On a lighter note, "The Cotton Chronicles: Tales of Farming and Fluff" by John Farmer offers an engaging glimpse into the world of cotton farming, replete with anecdotes that may or may not be entirely factual.

Taking a stride into the fictional domain, Barbara Kingsolver's "Prodigal Summer" weaves a captivating narrative set against the backdrop of a rural Appalachian community, delving into the intricate relationships between humans, nature, and the agricultural practices that bind them. On a more whimsical note, Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax" offers a cautionary tale about environmental conservation and the dire consequences of heedless industrialization – a tale that may hold more relevance to our investigation than initially meets the eye.

In our relentless pursuit of understanding, we also found ourselves engrossed in a marathon of children's cartoons and programming, hoping to glean insights from the most unlikely of sources. From the adventures of SpongeBob SquarePants to the veritable trove of wisdom tucked away in the pages of "Arthur's Garden – Delightful Bedtime Stories," we sought to unravel the enigmatic connection between genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma, even if it meant delving into the realms of aquatic pineapple habitats and animated aardvarks.

With a lighthearted spirit and a penchant for the unexpected, we approach the literature surrounding GMOs and childhood asthma with a keen eye and a ready smile, eager to uncover the delightful surprises that await us within the pages of statistical analyses and whimsical anecdotes.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and National Center for Health Statistics . You used data from 2000 to 2019

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As a society, we are constantly sowing the seeds of progress and innovation, particularly in the realm of agriculture. One such advancement that has sparked both fascination and controversy is the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crop cultivation. While the efficacy of GMOs in enhancing crop yield and resilience has been a subject of fervent debate, the potential ramifications of these genetic manipulations on human health have also garnered significant attention.
In this vein, our research endeavors to unearth the curious correlation between the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. While some may dismiss this connection as a mere flight of fancy, our statistical analyses have revealed a surprisingly robust relationship that should not be brushed off lightly.
The astute reader may ponder: "What do genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma have in common?" We humbly invite you to abandon preconceived notions and embark on this whimsical journey with us, where the unexpected connections between seemingly disparate entities will unfold before your very eyes.
Drawing upon a decade's worth of data from the USDA and the National Center for Health Statistics, we meticulously plowed through the numbers to discern whether there exists a discernible link. Our findings, sprinkled with amusing anecdotes and statistical revelations, promise to provide a breath of fresh air to the discourse on both GMOs and childhood respiratory health.
In the following sections, we will delve into the intricacies of GMO cultivation, dissect the physiological mechanisms underlying asthma attacks, and immerse ourselves in the statistical rabbit hole to uncover the compelling story that lies beneath. So strap on your statistical goggles and prepare for a blooming adventure, where the data speaks volumes and the puns are as abundant as cotton fields in summertime.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To dig into the intricate relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children, our research team took a deep dive into a bountiful harvest of data from the USDA and the National Center for Health Statistics. We plucked data from the years 2000 to 2019 like a diligent farmer gathering a fruitful yield, ensuring that our analysis encompassed a significant timeframe to capture any potential trends and patterns.

Our research methods were as varied and colorful as a patchwork quilt, with a blend of quantitative analyses and qualitative insights that could rival the complexity of a genetic code. We harnessed the power of advanced statistical techniques such as correlation analysis, regression modeling, and time series analysis to sift through the data like an asthmatic in a field of pollen, separating out the pertinent information from the chaff.

First, we undertook an in-depth examination of GMO cotton cultivation practices across different regions of the United States, scrutinizing factors such as prevalence of GMO seeds usage, pesticide application, and soil composition. Like a geneticist deciphering the DNA sequence, we sought to unravel the intricate web of variables that could potentially influence the asthma landscape.

Simultaneously, we delved into the trove of asthma data, exploring the prevalence, severity, and triggers of asthma attacks in American children. It was akin to navigating a maze of respiratory distress, seeking out clues and indicators that could shed light on any potential connection to GMO cotton cultivation.

In our quest to unearth the truth, we also incoroporated geographic and demographic variables, such as climate data, air quality indices, and socioeconomic characteristics, encapsulating the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon under investigation. This approach allowed us to capture the nuances of the relationship, much like how a painter carefully blends colors to capture the essence of a magnificent landscape.

Throughout this process, we kept a keen ear to the ground, listening to the rustle of the statistical leaves and the whispers of hidden correlations that elude the untrained eye. Our fingers danced across keyboards and data sheets like a maestro conducting a symphony, orchestrating the data into a harmonious melody of insights and revelations.

As we stitched together the tapestry of information, we ensured that our analysis was as robust and comprehensive as a durable thread woven into the fabric of science. Our methodologies embraced both the precision of quantitative analyses and the richness of qualitative interpretations, crafting a narrative that tells the story of GMO cotton and childhood asthma in captivating detail.

In essence, our research methodologies were as diverse and vibrant as the field of genetics itself, intertwining rigorous analyses with an imaginative flair that captures the curiosity and complexities of this whimsical exploration.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from USDA and National Center for Health Statistics .

For the time period 2000 to 2019, you found a correlation 0.8367236, r-squared of 0.7001064, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As a society, we are constantly sowing the seeds of progress and innovation, particularly in the realm of agriculture. One such advancement that has sparked both fascination and controversy is the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crop cultivation. While the efficacy of GMOs in enhancing crop yield and resilience has been a subject of fervent debate, the potential ramifications of these genetic manipulations on human health have also garnered significant attention.
In this vein, our research endeavors to unearth the curious correlation between the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. While some may dismiss this connection as a mere flight of fancy, our statistical analyses have revealed a surprisingly robust relationship that should not be brushed off lightly.
The astute reader may ponder: "What do genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma have in common?" We humbly invite you to abandon preconceived notions and embark on this whimsical journey with us, where the unexpected connections between seemingly disparate entities will unfold before your very eyes.
Drawing upon a decade's worth of data from the USDA and the National Center for Health Statistics, we meticulously plowed through the numbers to discern whether there exists a discernible link. Our findings, sprinkled with amusing anecdotes and statistical revelations, promise to provide a breath of fresh air to the discourse on both GMOs and childhood respiratory health.
In the following sections, we will delve into the intricacies of GMO cultivation, dissect the physiological mechanisms underlying asthma attacks, and immerse ourselves in the statistical rabbit hole to uncover the compelling story that lies beneath. So strap on your statistical goggles and prepare for a blooming adventure, where the data speaks volumes and the puns are as abundant as cotton fields in summertime.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis unearthed a striking correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. The correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 indicates a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated entities. This finding was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.7001064, signifying that approximately 70.01% of the variance in asthma attacks can be explained by the presence of GMOs in cotton cultivation. With a p-value of less than 0.01, we can confidently assert that this correlation is not a mere statistical fluke, but rather a bona fide association worthy of attention.

To visually illustrate the robust connection we uncovered, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot displaying the compelling relationship between GMO use in cotton and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. The scatterplot unequivocally portrays a positive linear trend, leaving little room for doubt that there is more to this correlation than meets the eye.

Our results serve as a poignant reminder that the world of statistics is often filled with unexpected surprises and correlations that may leave us itching for more insights. While it may seem far-fetched that GMO cotton could be linked to childhood asthma, our findings urge us to keep an open mind and a keen eye on these intriguing connections as we navigate the complex landscape of agricultural innovations and public health.

This whimsical journey provides a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health, offering a blend of data-driven rigor and lighthearted curiosity. The seeds of knowledge we have sown through this investigation are not ones to be sneezed at, as they open the door to further exploration at the intersection of agricultural practices and childhood respiratory wellness.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith (2015) explores the impact of genetically modified cotton on agricultural yields, focusing on the potential benefits and drawbacks of incorporating GMO technology into cotton cultivation. Meanwhile, Doe and Jones (2018) investigate the prevalence of childhood asthma in the United States, analyzing demographic and environmental factors that may contribute to the onset of respiratory conditions. As we wade through these scholarly works, we are reminded of the complexities inherent in both the agricultural and public health spheres. However, could these seemingly unrelated realms converge in an unexpected and, dare we say, whimsical manner?
Transitioning from the world of academia to the realm of non-fiction literature, "Seeds of Controversy: The Hidden Story of Genetic Engineering" by Jane Goodall provides a thought-provoking exploration of the ethical and ecological implications of genetically modified organisms, including their potential effects on human health. On a lighter note, "The Cotton Chronicles: Tales of Farming and Fluff" by John Farmer offers an engaging glimpse into the world of cotton farming, replete with anecdotes that may or may not be entirely factual.
Taking a stride into the fictional domain, Barbara Kingsolver's "Prodigal Summer" weaves a captivating narrative set against the backdrop of a rural Appalachian community, delving into the intricate relationships between humans, nature, and the agricultural practices that bind them. On a more whimsical note, Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax" offers a cautionary tale about environmental conservation and the dire consequences of heedless industrialization – a tale that may hold more relevance to our investigation than initially meets the eye.
In our relentless pursuit of understanding, we also found ourselves engrossed in a marathon of children's cartoons and programming, hoping to glean insights from the most unlikely of sources. From the adventures of SpongeBob SquarePants to the veritable trove of wisdom tucked away in the pages of "Arthur's Garden – Delightful Bedtime Stories," we sought to unravel the enigmatic connection between genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma, even if it meant delving into the realms of aquatic pineapple habitats and animated aardvarks.
With a lighthearted spirit and a penchant for the unexpected, we approach the literature surrounding GMOs and childhood asthma with a keen eye and a ready smile, eager to uncover the delightful surprises that await us within the pages of statistical analyses and whimsical anecdotes.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis unearthed a striking correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. The correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 indicates a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated entities. This finding was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.7001064, signifying that approximately 70.01% of the variance in asthma attacks can be explained by the presence of GMOs in cotton cultivation. With a p-value of less than 0.01, we can confidently assert that this correlation is not a mere statistical fluke, but rather a bona fide association worthy of attention.
To visually illustrate the robust connection we uncovered, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot displaying the compelling relationship between GMO use in cotton and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. The scatterplot unequivocally portrays a positive linear trend, leaving little room for doubt that there is more to this correlation than meets the eye.
Our results serve as a poignant reminder that the world of statistics is often filled with unexpected surprises and correlations that may leave us itching for more insights. While it may seem far-fetched that GMO cotton could be linked to childhood asthma, our findings urge us to keep an open mind and a keen eye on these intriguing connections as we navigate the complex landscape of agricultural innovations and public health.
This whimsical journey provides a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health, offering a blend of data-driven rigor and lighthearted curiosity. The seeds of knowledge we have sown through this investigation are not ones to be sneezed at, as they open the door to further exploration at the intersection of agricultural practices and childhood respiratory wellness.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings not only reveal a robust statistical connection between genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma but also sprout a garden of curiosities and possibilities. It seems the tendrils of GMO cotton reach further than the fields they are planted in, extending into the respiratory health of our young sprouts. As we step back to admire the statistical sunflowers in our garden of data, we are left pondering the broader implications and potential mechanisms behind this unexpected correlation.

Our results echo the sentiments expressed by Smith (2015) and Goodall (Year Unknown), who both hinted at the intricate web of consequences woven by GMO technology. Indeed, our statistical harvest lends support to the notion that the relationship between agricultural practices and public health is not merely a whimsical figment of imagination, but a tangible reality worthy of further investigation. Just as the Lorax spoke for the trees, our data seems to whisper a tale of caution and consideration when it comes to the decisions we make in our agricultural endeavors.

The surprising overlap between GMO cotton and childhood asthma is reminiscent of the unexpected delights found in the whimsical storytelling of "Arthur's Garden" and the cautionary wisdom of Dr. Seuss's "The Lorax." Just as these tales left us pondering the nuanced connections between humanity, nature, and ecological balance, our research encourages a deeper consideration of the unanticipated ramifications of GMO cultivation. Sometimes, the most fruitful insights emerge from the most unexpected soil, whether that be the fields of statistical analysis or the whimsical world of children's literature.

While our results lay a sturdy foundation for understanding the interplay between GMO use in cotton and childhood asthma, there is still an orchard of unanswered questions ripe for further exploration. The blossoming correlation we unveiled provides a potent and compelling basis for deeper investigation into the precise mechanisms through which GMO cotton may influence respiratory health. As we ponder the potential avenues for future research, we are reminded that scientific inquiry, much like a well-tended garden, requires careful nurturing and continual cultivation to yield the ripest fruits of understanding.

In closing, our research offers a lighthearted yet rigorous examination of the unexpected link between GMO cotton and childhood asthma. As our findings take root in the fertile soils of statistical analysis and playful curiosity, they beckon us to venture further into this uncharted terrain, armed with the seedlings of knowledge and the promise of further revelations. Let us tread this whimsical path of discovery with open hearts and keen minds, for the seeds we have sown in this investigation are no trifling matter, but rather a fertile ground for future exploration and insight.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between GMO use in cotton and Asthma attacks in American children. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As a society, we are constantly sowing the seeds of progress and innovation, particularly in the realm of agriculture. One such advancement that has sparked both fascination and controversy is the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crop cultivation. While the efficacy of GMOs in enhancing crop yield and resilience has been a subject of fervent debate, the potential ramifications of these genetic manipulations on human health have also garnered significant attention.
In this vein, our research endeavors to unearth the curious correlation between the utilization of GMOs in cotton farming and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. While some may dismiss this connection as a mere flight of fancy, our statistical analyses have revealed a surprisingly robust relationship that should not be brushed off lightly.
The astute reader may ponder: "What do genetically modified cotton and childhood asthma have in common?" We humbly invite you to abandon preconceived notions and embark on this whimsical journey with us, where the unexpected connections between seemingly disparate entities will unfold before your very eyes.
Drawing upon a decade's worth of data from the USDA and the National Center for Health Statistics, we meticulously plowed through the numbers to discern whether there exists a discernible link. Our findings, sprinkled with amusing anecdotes and statistical revelations, promise to provide a breath of fresh air to the discourse on both GMOs and childhood respiratory health.
In the following sections, we will delve into the intricacies of GMO cultivation, dissect the physiological mechanisms underlying asthma attacks, and immerse ourselves in the statistical rabbit hole to uncover the compelling story that lies beneath. So strap on your statistical goggles and prepare for a blooming adventure, where the data speaks volumes and the puns are as abundant as cotton fields in summertime.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis unearthed a striking correlation between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. The correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 indicates a strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated entities. This finding was further supported by an r-squared value of 0.7001064, signifying that approximately 70.01% of the variance in asthma attacks can be explained by the presence of GMOs in cotton cultivation. With a p-value of less than 0.01, we can confidently assert that this correlation is not a mere statistical fluke, but rather a bona fide association worthy of attention.
To visually illustrate the robust connection we uncovered, we present Fig. 1, a scatterplot displaying the compelling relationship between GMO use in cotton and the incidence of asthma attacks in American children. The scatterplot unequivocally portrays a positive linear trend, leaving little room for doubt that there is more to this correlation than meets the eye.
Our results serve as a poignant reminder that the world of statistics is often filled with unexpected surprises and correlations that may leave us itching for more insights. While it may seem far-fetched that GMO cotton could be linked to childhood asthma, our findings urge us to keep an open mind and a keen eye on these intriguing connections as we navigate the complex landscape of agricultural innovations and public health.
This whimsical journey provides a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health, offering a blend of data-driven rigor and lighthearted curiosity. The seeds of knowledge we have sown through this investigation are not ones to be sneezed at, as they open the door to further exploration at the intersection of agricultural practices and childhood respiratory wellness.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has unearthed a surprisingly robust relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton farming and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. The statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01 leave little room for doubt – this connection is nothing to be brushed off lightly, much like a cotton field after a hearty windstorm!

Our findings may initially seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack, but they serve as a stark reminder that statistical analysis can often yield unexpected surprises. It's as if we've stumbled upon a hidden pathway in a labyrinth, only to find that it leads us to a field of genetically muddled cotton – quite the unexpected twist!

As we bask in the afterglow of our data-driven exploration, it's evident that this research has not only shed light on the whimsical coupling between GMOs and childhood asthma, but has also sown the seeds for further inquiry at the intersection of agricultural practices and respiratory health. Our journey has shown that the statistical rabbit hole, much like a cotton burrow, can yield hidden treasures when approached with curiosity and a dash of humor.

In light of these compelling findings, we assert that no further research is needed in this area. It's time to tie a ribbon around this statistical bouquet, for we have blossomed into a new realm of understanding. With our work, we have provided a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on childhood respiratory wellness, leaving our readers with a newfound appreciation for the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate entities. The seeds of knowledge have been sown, and they're certainly not ones to be sneezed at!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Genetic Medicine and Environmental Health


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Genomic Agriculture and Pediatric Health


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Genetically Muddled Offspring: Exploring the Asthma-GMO Cotton Connection in American Children with an abstract of This paper delves into the curious relationship between the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in cotton cultivation and the prevalence of asthma attacks in American children. Armed with USDA and National Center for Health Statistics data from 2000 to 2019, our research team sought to uncover whether there exists a statistically significant link between these seemingly unrelated entities. Employing rigorous statistical analyses, we calculated a robust correlation coefficient of 0.8367236 and p < 0.01, lending substance to our findings. With humorous anecdotes interwoven within the data analysis, this research aims to shed light on this whimsical coupling while providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse surrounding GMOs and their potential impact on respiratory health. Join us in this lively investigation where the seeds of knowledge are sown and the results are nothing to sneeze at!

ChatGPT:

GMO cotton, asthma prevalence, genetically modified organisms and asthma, GMO cotton cultivation, asthma attacks in American children, USDA data, National Center for Health Statistics, GMOs impact on respiratory health, correlation between GMOs and asthma

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

GMO use in cotton
Detailed data title: Percent of cotton planted in Other States that is genetically modified to be insect-resistant (Bt), but not herbicide-tolerant (HT)
Source: USDA
See what else correlates with GMO use in cotton

Asthma attacks in American children
Detailed data title: Percent of children in the US 0-4 years old who have had an asthma attack in the past year
Source: National Center for Health Statistics
See what else correlates with Asthma attacks in American children

Correlation r = 0.8367236 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.7001064 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 70% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Asthma attacks in American children) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., GMO use in cotton) over the 20 years from 2000 through 2019.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 4.3E-6. 0.0000042609439202281570000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.84 in 0.00043% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 234,690 random variables You don't actually need 234 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.63, 0.93 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019
GMO use in cotton (GMO cotton %)1718191822182127222424212453103322
Asthma attacks in American children (Percent of children)4.44.74.94.23.94.44.54.14.14.54.64.43.52.82.63.22.52.92.91.4




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([17,18,19,18,22,18,21,27,22,24,24,21,24,5,3,10,3,3,2,2,])
array_2 = np.array([4.4,4.7,4.9,4.2,3.9,4.4,4.5,4.1,4.1,4.5,4.6,4.4,3.5,2.8,2.6,3.2,2.5,2.9,2.9,1.4,])
array_1_name = "GMO use in cotton"
array_2_name = "Asthma attacks in American children"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is stellar!


Correlation ID: 3779 · Black Variable ID: 777 · Red Variable ID: 1142
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0