Founders

Protein Causes Cancer

1. A funny test was recently conducted by a guy on Twitter. He published several posts with opposing statements to see which would be more popular.

2. There were three pairs of posts. "Sugar is good for you" and "sugar is bad for you." "Protein cures cancer" and "Protein causes cancer." "Eat less protein" and "Eat more protein."

3. The winners in the pairs by number of views by a multiple margin were the posts "Protein causes cancer," "Sugar is bad for you," and "Eat less protein." At the same time, the relative popularity of the winners was also by a multiple margin - "Protein causes cancer," "Sugar is bad for you," and "Eat less protein."

Here will be presented the translation of the Telegram channel Dark Side in English. https://t.me/temno

4. It turns out that the audience is more receptive to negative statements than to positive ones - "causes" instead of "treats", "harmful" instead of "useful" and "eat less" instead of "eat more". At the same time, the more terrible and clearly expressed the negativity, the more they are receptive to it - the risk of "getting sick" > it is "harmful" > "eat less".

5. Here you can spin a lot of nonsense about the depravity of the mass audience, although it is all about human nature. The trick is that the human brain would explode from overload if it allocated the same resources to processing all incoming information.