1096: Clinically Studied Ingredient

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Is it really Megan?!?!)
(This is such a blatant and out of place line in the middle of the description. There's no need for that here.)
Line 11: Line 11:
 
This comic is poking fun at a phrase which some ads use to boost sales of their product. They state that their product contains a "clinically studied ingredient", which consumers assume means that the product itself has been clinically tested and proven. However, the phrase is very ambiguous. Firstly, only a single ingredient has necessarily been studied, not the combined effect of all the ingredients in the product (which can produce drastically different effects). Secondly, the phrase just states an ingredient was clinically studied, and doesn't mention the findings of that study (which, for all we know, could have found the ingredient to be ineffective or harmful). In other words, the phrase is used in shrewd marketing techniques.
 
This comic is poking fun at a phrase which some ads use to boost sales of their product. They state that their product contains a "clinically studied ingredient", which consumers assume means that the product itself has been clinically tested and proven. However, the phrase is very ambiguous. Firstly, only a single ingredient has necessarily been studied, not the combined effect of all the ingredients in the product (which can produce drastically different effects). Secondly, the phrase just states an ingredient was clinically studied, and doesn't mention the findings of that study (which, for all we know, could have found the ingredient to be ineffective or harmful). In other words, the phrase is used in shrewd marketing techniques.
  
There is a question as to whether the long-haired female is Megan or not.
+
In the comic, we come in the middle of a conversation with a female character (which may or may not be [[Megan]] - it is unclear) telling [[Cueball]] that she's been tested. Although, she doesn't state what she was tested for, the implication is that they were talking about {{w|STD}}s. However, Megan does not reveal the results of the tests. When Cueball inquires, Megan acts like he is being unreasonable to also want that information. In this way, [[Randall Munroe|Randall]] is making an analogy to how the marketer might think consumers would be unreasonable to want to know the ''results'' of the clinical studys on the ingredient.
 
+
In the comic, we come in the middle of a conversation with a female character telling [[Cueball]] that she's been tested. Although, she doesn't state what she was tested for, the implication is that they were talking about {{w|STD}}s. However, Megan does not reveal the results of the tests. When Cueball inquires, Megan acts like he is being unreasonable to also want that information. In this way, [[Randall Munroe|Randall]] is making an analogy to how the marketer might think consumers would be unreasonable to want to know the ''results'' of the clinical studys on the ingredient.
+
  
 
In the title text, {{w|Roger Ebert}} is a famous film critic. However, we can expect most big name movies to be watched by him. Simply stating that he saw a movie doesn't necessarily mean that he liked it.
 
In the title text, {{w|Roger Ebert}} is a famous film critic. However, we can expect most big name movies to be watched by him. Simply stating that he saw a movie doesn't necessarily mean that he liked it.
  
 
{{Comic discussion}}
 
{{Comic discussion}}

Revision as of 18:08, 17 August 2012

Clinically Studied Ingredient
Blatantly banking on customers not understanding that it's like a Hollywood studio advertising that their new movie was 'watched by Roger Ebert'.
Title text: Blatantly banking on customers not understanding that it's like a Hollywood studio advertising that their new movie was 'watched by Roger Ebert'.

Explanation

This comic is poking fun at a phrase which some ads use to boost sales of their product. They state that their product contains a "clinically studied ingredient", which consumers assume means that the product itself has been clinically tested and proven. However, the phrase is very ambiguous. Firstly, only a single ingredient has necessarily been studied, not the combined effect of all the ingredients in the product (which can produce drastically different effects). Secondly, the phrase just states an ingredient was clinically studied, and doesn't mention the findings of that study (which, for all we know, could have found the ingredient to be ineffective or harmful). In other words, the phrase is used in shrewd marketing techniques.

In the comic, we come in the middle of a conversation with a female character (which may or may not be Megan - it is unclear) telling Cueball that she's been tested. Although, she doesn't state what she was tested for, the implication is that they were talking about STDs. However, Megan does not reveal the results of the tests. When Cueball inquires, Megan acts like he is being unreasonable to also want that information. In this way, Randall is making an analogy to how the marketer might think consumers would be unreasonable to want to know the results of the clinical studys on the ingredient.

In the title text, Roger Ebert is a famous film critic. However, we can expect most big name movies to be watched by him. Simply stating that he saw a movie doesn't necessarily mean that he liked it.

comment.png add a comment! ⋅ Icons-mini-action refresh blue.gif refresh comments!

Discussion

  • "Clinical", coming from the greek word κλίνη for bed, also suggests research on patients. Maybe this is (another reason) why Cueball is in a bed. 79.103.255.154 09:23, 30 August 2012 (UTC)tetartos
  • The 1997 parody film Plump Fiction (an atrocious film from the looks of it) jokingly used the tagline «From the producers who saw "Pulp Fiction", "Reservoir Dogs" and "Braveheart"» to the same effect. --Buggz (talk) 11:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    It's a similar effect, although in that case, the joke isn't that the tagline doesn't indicate whether the producers liked the other films, the joke there is that normally the tagline would tell you other works the producers had themselves produced. There is no ambiguity in the tagline, as it's pretty clear the producers of that film didn't produce the other films. TheHYPO (talk) 14:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    I meant to compare the tagline to the title text, not the comic itself. --Buggz (talk) 13:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I think the joke isn't just that what Megan was tested for isn't clear, but like the clinically studied compound, she doesn't say if she was found to be healthy or not.
    I don't think the fact that she doesn't say what she was tested for is part of the joke at all. I think we just come in in the middle of a conversation where the previous line was something like "How do I know you don't have any STDs?". Also, please sign your comments by putting four tildes after it ( ~~~~ ) TheHYPO (talk) 14:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Longer hair than normal, but maybe it's just too early this morning for me. Tebow Time, Twice a Day. 12:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    Hmmm... I'm inclined to think it's not Megan, unless she has a perm. (Megan's is consistently spaghetti-straight.) (qv xkcd 1089) -- IronyChef (talk) 13:53, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    I'll go on record that this is *not* Megan. We have a few variants of female characters based only on the hair and this is not consistent with her other appearances. --Jeff (talk) 14:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    Approve completely; I removed all references to her. - Cos (talk) 23:35, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
  • No matter how I squint at this one, that extra line just doesn't seem to make sense... unless there is a penis in this cartoon.
    Nope, nothing so bawdy. The left knee is just a little higher than the right. -- IronyChef (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    I don't even see an extra line. I took the pointed corner Cueball's right arm is on to be the corner of the bed (a stylized slanted bed) with the round line being the covers that don't come to the end. Alternatively, as IronyChef suggests, the round is the end of the bed, and cueball has his right hand on his right leg while his left leg is raised (with his knee around the area of his right wrist) TheHYPO (talk) 14:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Interestingly, a Google search of the subject phrase of this comic brings up this comic as the first (few) results. There are, however, actual product examples that come up. I had never heard the phrase used; but apparently it is, for example, by Progesic or Myobuild (note: explainxkcd does not endorse the use of these misleading products) TheHYPO (talk) 14:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Other examples include Super CitriMax®, which contains "a clinically studied ingredient for weight management", and UC-II®, which contains an ingredient that has been "clinically studied to support joint comfort, mobility and flexibility". [1] ~ Quackslikeaduck (talk) 18:59, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
  • "the phrase is used in shrewd marketing techniques": Not sure that shrewd is correct - deceitful?
    I've put "elusive" - Cos (talk) 23:35, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
    Elusive means it is hard to find/capture. I think deceptive is the right word.98.250.93.41 01:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)Brion
  • I first interpreted "So many questions" in the comic in that the tests themselves raised 'so many questions'. It's probably not the correct interpretation, but I figured I would leave a comment about it. --Yuriy206 (talk) 20:51, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
    Not being a native english speaker, I interpreted that phrase as Megan(?) being upset about being asked "so many questions!". 108.162.212.38 20:44, 4 February 2014 (UTC)


Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Tools

It seems you are using noscript, which is stopping our project wonderful ads from working. Explain xkcd uses ads to pay for bandwidth, and we manually approve all our advertisers, and our ads are restricted to unobtrusive images and slow animated GIFs. If you found this site helpful, please consider whitelisting us.

Want to advertise with us, or donate to us with Paypal or Bitcoin?