And The Best Tasting Protein Supp Is.......

[bigkevin20]

Hello my fellow wannbebiggers I wanted an idea of what you think is the best protein shake. I want some ideas and advice for when I shop for a new jug.

My choice is
Isopure Zero Carb Strawberry
whats yours?

[Paul Stagg]

Steak.

[bigkevin20]

Paul is steak some thing I should be eating every day as post work out or just alot threw the day every day?

[Paul Stagg]

Whevever you like.

[bigkevin20]

im still trying to lose fat though
and I no you said steak but do you have protein supp of yur choice due to the way it taste?

[bigkevin20]

any one else?

[Clint Calaway]

ISS Research Whey Matrix.

Vanilla and Choclate is pretty good....

[Enock]

Prostar bannawhey

hell, if I'm pigging out on the weekend I usually end up eating a good portion of my tubs. Its soo damn good I eat it straight w/ a spoon

[zwarrior99]

HDT, CHOCLATE

[Stray]

Steak has been linked toASSCANCER.And for my money.... Cancer of the ass has to be the worst kind you can get.

[Paul Stagg]

You are joking, right?

[Blood&Iron]

Originally posted by Paul Stagg
You are joking, right?
I believe he means colon cancer, and he is correct.

[bigkevin20]

Prostar bannawhey

hell, if I'm pigging out on the weekend I usually end up eating a good portion of my tubs

Damn you eat the powder dry must be some good *****
lol

[NSX]

Met-rx protien plus, chocolate or vanilla.

[Wolfgar73]

Meso tech and nitro tech taste pretty good..if you can afford them..lol...

[Vido]

ISS Pro M3 (chocolate flavour) is delicious. Too bad it's so damn expensive.

[RSinz]

Pro Whey by Pro Lab is fairly tolerable. Mixes well and used in conjunction with N-Large- I found it produces rapid mass results. Besides, what more can be said about protein supplements, they all tend to taste like cement and smell like feet and ass. Good luck to you.

[Maki Riddington]

I don't mind EAS.
Prolab is ok as well.

[Paul Stagg]

As I recall, the studies linking red meat to cancer ignored what the subjects were (or were not) eating in the rest of their diet.

Eating red meat will not give you cancer.

[Stray]

Hrmm...study conducted by scientists.....or some anonymous person on a messageboard.


I'll stick by my statement.

[The_Chicken_Daddy]

Isn't it linked with carcinogens from the HCA's generated from grilling?

[Savannah]

The Birthday Boy says:
do me a favour
The Birthday Boy says:
go to the supps forum
The Birthday Boy says:
the best tasting protein thread
The Birthday Boy says:
and post this "Isn't it linked with carcinogens from the HCA's generated from grilling?"


Um ok chigs, :scratch:

[The_Chicken_Daddy]

Ah ace! it worked!

Just ignore that crazy woman eh?

[Stray]

I think alot of it IS based on how its cooked...as the same numbers aren't coming up in Europe that are coming up here in the US.

Heres a ok read on the matter: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-12/ajoc-aod121401.php

I'm at work and don't have time to dig up any good articles but thats a start.

Sorry to derail...


To get back on topic..best tasting protein supp? Optimum Nutrition Vanilla Flavor!

[The_Chicken_Daddy]

Originally posted by Stray
I think alot of it IS based on how its cooked...

Yeah, that's what i thought.

The fruit and veg help reverse the effect cause they contain antioxidants, vitamins and minerals etc... and are good for gut health in general.

[Paul Stagg]

Find me a study showing causality.

What you'll find are general findings that red meat and cancer may be correlated in populations. You'll also find that in most cases it is virtually impossible to control for variances in diet.

Subject a eats red meat 3 times a week, and eats lots of fruits and veggies.

Subject b eats red meat 3 times a week, and eats bread, wine, beer, and french fries.

The study result? 50% of people studied who eat red meat get ass cancer. Headline news.

The cooking method applies to all food, not just cows.

There is no reason to avoid red meat as part of an overall healthy, balanced diet.

See, some of us morons on message boards actually have the capacity to read and comprehend studies, instead of following along like sheep with what the media/government/elite tell us.

The study you post a link to is virtually worthless, as it studies people who are already sick, and ignores the MILLIONS who are not sick who follow similar diets, and of course, ignores other possible common factors.

[The_Chicken_Daddy]

Aye.

[cyclone]

Good one Sensei Stagg.

For my money, the best tasting protein supp is MILK!

[Stray]

As I said, Paul, I'm at work and can't furnish alot of links supporting my case. This isn't a singled-out isolated study that states this..theres been numerous physicians that'll back up links from cancer to red meats.

Eat all the redmeat you want but don't let it bias your opinion.


http://www.rnw.nl/science/html/cancer010227.html

http://www.britishmeat.com/prostate.htm

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9609/17/cancer/

http://www.cancerpage.com/cancernews/cancernews3350.htm (this one shouldn't bug you too much...unless theres something your not telling us, Paul)

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/1671.52720


I'm not gonna start a flame war with you over what you beleive vs what I beleive.Its irrelevant to the thread. :D

It is safe to say its still early and who knows what news the American Journal of Medicine will tell us tommorow.

[Paul Stagg]

As I said, Paul, I'm at work and can't furnish alot of links supporting my case. This isn't a singled-out isolated study that states this..theres been numerous physicians that'll back up links from cancer to red meats.

** Links do not equal causality. I've yet to see anything showing a CAUSAL relationship. What I have seen indicates a diet low in fiber, fruits, veggies, etc coupled with a diet high in animal fat and flesh tends to be associated with a higher risk of many cancers. However, many people who never eat meat get cancer, and lots and lots of people who eat lots of red meat never get cancer.

Eat all the redmeat you want but don't let it bias your opinion.

** It doesn't. Goodness knows I don't want ass cancer. I like to smoke, but it doesn't bias my opinion that smoking is bad for you (I also no longer smoke)

http://www.rnw.nl/science/html/cancer010227.html

** Shows us a theory, but little else, I'm afraid. I'd like to read the entire paper. Certainly the best info you've provided, though, as it does delve into HOW it could happen. It will be more impressive when a study is done on humans.

http://www.britishmeat.com/prostate.htm

** Meaningless. Again, it looked at people who died from cancer. Further, the last paragraph makes it clear the link is to high animal fat AND low fiber.

http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9609/17/cancer/

** Doesn't refer to any science at all.

http://www.cancerpage.com/cancernews/cancernews3350.htm (this one shouldn't bug you too much...unless theres something your not telling us, Paul)

** Again, looks at people who ALREADY HAVE CANCER. That is not how one determines causality, as is not a random sample. It makes the findings virtually meaningless to the general population. It also doesn't narrow anything down.


http://my.webmd.com/content/article/1671.52720

** The study referenced is meaningful, as it looks at healthy and sick people, but again is not random. It doesn't at all show a causal relationship, or even a link to red meat. It shows a link to 'unhealthy' diet.

I'm not gonna start a flame war with you over what you beleive vs what I beleive.Its irrelevant to the thread.

** I'm discussing facts. A flame war with me would be a futile effort on your part, as I control the delete button.

[Stray]

"A flame war with me would be a futile effort on your part, as I control the delete button."

Please let's not drag oppression and cencorship into our little discussion about ass cancer.

[Belial]

Rectum? Damn near killed 'em!

ha ha

[Stray]

Liquor? I just met her!


Ahem.*clears throat*

[Paul Stagg]

Originally posted by Stray
"A flame war with me would be a futile effort on your part, as I control the delete button."

Please let's not drag oppression and cencorship into our little discussion about ass cancer.

LMAO.

True. No discussion regarding ass cancer should be oppressed.

[Stray]

God bless my american right to discuss ass cancer whenever I may please.

*salutes flag and wipes away single tear*

[WannaBeStrong]

I am allergic to beef and pork. I can eat turkey, chicken, and fish just fine though.

What has two thumbs and isn't getting ass cancer?

:thumbup: :thumbup: This guy!

[Juan]

Now Paul Stagg, I assume there was a control group, and the test was double blind (no one had any idea what they were being tested for). You assume that the people who eat more red meat have an overall less healthy diet as far as other things go. I don't know how good of an assumption that is. Many people, just don't like red meat very much, but eat **** foods anyways.

As for the original topic: Designer Protein Strawberry flavor is the best that I have tried. Good stuff.

[Paul Stagg]

You make an incorrect assumption.

Read the studies.

[Juan]

If the test aint blind, and there is no control group, the study is almost worthless.

[The_Chicken_Daddy]

Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy
Isn't it linked with carcinogens from the HCA's generated from grilling?

Ok, just to see how wrong/right i was, i did a quick pubmed search on "red meat AND HCAs". I've only scanned this abstratcs, but they do seem to point out that it's the way the meat is cooked (and the HCAs that result) and NOT the meat itself that has the carcinogens.

Pharmacogenetics 2002 Mar;12(2):145-50 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Genetic polymorphisms in heterocyclic amine metabolism and risk of colorectal adenomas.

Ishibe N, Sinha R, Hein DW, Kulldorff M, Strickland P, Fretland AJ, Chow WH, Kadlubar FF, Lang NP, Rothman N.

Genetic Epidemioly Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland 20892, USA. ishiben@exchange.nih.gov

High red meat intake has been linked with an increased risk of colorectal cancer and adenomas. During high temperature cooking of red meats, heterocyclic amines (HCAs) are generated; however, to be carcinogenic, they must be metabolized by enzymes including cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) and N-acetyltransferase 1 (NAT1) and/or N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2). We have conducted a clinic-based case-control study of colorectal adenomas that focused on assessment of exposure to HCAs (estimated by use of a HCA database and meat cooking module) and modification of these exposures by genetic factors. We have previously reported that intake of MeIQx was associated with an increased risk of colorectal adenomas [overall association at 80th percentile, > 27.00 ng/day: odds ratio (OR) = 2.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.58-4.55]. Here, we report our evaluation of whether variation in CYP1A2, NAT1 and/or NAT2 modify the association between HCAs and colorectal adenoma formation in 146 cases and 228 frequency-matched controls. The NAT1*10 allele was associated with a nonsignificant increased risk of colorectal adenomas (OR = 1.43; 95% CI 0.86-2.36). Further, when we analysed 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MeIQx) intake as a categorical variable, we observed a six-fold increase in adenoma risk among rapid NAT1 acetylators who consumed more than 27 ng a day (OR = 6.50; 95% CI 2.16-19.7), whereas among slow NAT1 acetylators, the increase in risk was two-fold (OR = 2.32; 95% CI 1.12-4.81). While suggestive, the results were not significantly different from each other on either an additive or multiplicative scale. In contrast, NAT2 genotype and CYP1A2 and NAT2 hepatic activity measured by caffeine urinary metabolites were not associated with adenoma risk, although an increase in risk with rapid CYP1A2 activity could not be ruled out (OR = 1.46; 95% CI 0.76-2.81). Moreover, there was no evidence that the effect of MeIQx was enhanced among subjects in any subgroup defined by variation in these measures. These results are compatible with the hypothesis that high HCA exposure is associated with an increased risk of colorectal adenomas, particularly in genetically susceptible subgroups. Further study of larger populations is needed to confirm and extend these observations.

PMID: 11875368 [PubMed - in process]


Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001 May;10(5):559-62 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Dietary intake of heterocyclic amines, meat-derived mutagenic activity, and risk of colorectal adenomas.

Sinha R, Kulldorff M, Chow WH, Denobile J, Rothman N.

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Rockville, Maryland 20892, USA.

Meats cooked well-done by high temperature techniques produce mutagenic compounds such as heterocyclic amines (HCAs), but the amounts of these compounds vary by cooking techniques, temperature, time, and type of meat. We investigated the role of HCAs in the etiology of colorectal adenomas and the extent to which they may explain the previously observed risk for red meat and meat-cooking methods. In a case-control study of colorectal adenomas, cases (n = 146) were diagnosed with colorectal adenomas at sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy, and controls (n = 228) were found not to have colorectal adenomas at sigmoidoscopy. Using a meat-derived HCA and mutagen database and responses from a meat-cooking questionnaire module, we estimated intake of 2-amino-3,4,8-trimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (DiMeIQx), 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MeIQx), 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) and mutagenic activity. We calculated odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals using logistic regression adjusting for several established risk factors for colorectal adenomas or cancer. The odds ratios (95% confidence interval; P for trend test) fifth versus first quintiles are: 2.2 (1.2-4.1; P = 0.02) for DiMeIQx; 2.1 (1.0-4.3; P = 0.002) for MeIQx; 2.5(1.1-5.5; P = 0.02) for PhIP; and 3.1 (1.4-6.8; P = 0.001) for mutagenic activity. When the three HCAs were adjusted for the other two, only the trend for MeIQx (P = 0.04) remained statistically significant. When we tried to disentangle the relative contribution of the three HCAs from the meat variables, we found that MeIQx remained significantly associated with risk even when adjusted for red meat but not vice versa. When MeIQx and well-done meat were analyzed in the same model, the risks were attenuated for both. Mutagenic activity from meat remained significantly associated with increased risk even when adjusted for intake of red meat or well-done red meat, whereas the red meat and well-done red meat associations were no longer significant when adjusted for total mutagenic activity. In conclusion, we found an elevated risk of colorectal adenomas associated with high intake of certain HCAS: Further, mutagenic activity from cooked meat consumption, a measure that integrates all of the classes of mutagens, was strongly associated with risk and explained the excess risk with intake of well-done red meat.

PMID: 11352869 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Cancer Lett 1999 Sep 1;143(2):189-94 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Role of well-done, grilled red meat, heterocyclic amines (HCAs) in the etiology of human cancer.

Sinha R, Rothman N.

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, NCI, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892-7374, USA. sinhar@nih.gov

High-temperature cooking techniques and doneness level of red meat are linked to cancer of various sites, particularly colorectal cancer. In a colorectal adenoma study, we found an elevated risk for red meat consumption that was mainly due to an association with well-done/very well-done red meat. High-temperature cooking methods (i.e. grilling) were also associated with increased risk. We are currently using an HCA database linked to this questionnaire to estimate MeIQx, DiMeIQx and PhIP consumption and determine their association with risk of colorectal adenoma. Similar results on red meat doneness and fried meat were found in a case-control study of lung cancer. Thus, initial positive findings are stimulating the development of a more refined questionnaire instrument and its validation using food diaries, 24-h recalls, biomarkers of internal dose and direct food measurements. Furthermore, the use of these exposure assessment approaches are being used in large prospective studies world wide and should help clarify the role of doneness, cooking practices and pyrolysis products in the etiology of human cancer.

PMID: 10503902 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Eur J Cancer Prev 1999 Jul;8(3):201-6 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Heterocyclic amine levels in cooked meat and the implication for New Zealanders.

Thomson B.

ESR, Christchurch, New Zealand. barbara.thomson@esr.cri.nz

This paper was presented to an expert workshop on meat intake and colorectal cancer risk, held in Adelaide, Australia on 4 December 1998, as a contribution to discussion of the possible role of heterocyclic amines (HCAs) in colorectal cancer. HCAs, which are genotoxic and carcinogenic to experimental animals, are formed in fish, meat and meat residues under certain cooking conditions which are relevant to human lifestyle practices. The most important variables contributing to the formation of HCAs are: cooking temperature (>150 degrees C), cooking time (>2 min), cooking method (frying, oven grilling/broiling, barbecuing), and meat type (e.g. sausage < whole meat). Humans will be exposed to HCAs from the consumption of meat or fish cooked by these methods and from the consumption of gravy prepared from pan residues. Approximately one-third of the meat consumed on a daily basis in New Zealand is cooked by methods likely to result in the formation of HCAs. When intake estimates are combined with animal cancer potency data, the greatest contributor to cancer risk is from the consumption of chicken. Red meat is no more implicated than any other meat type. Although the role of HCA in human cancer is yet to be clearly established, exposure can be minimized by lifestyle choices.

PMID: 10443948 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 1999 Jan 10;119(1):45-9 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


[Heterocyclic amines in cooked meat]

[Article in Norwegian]

Vikse R, Reistad R, Steffensen IL, Paulsen JE, Nyholm SH, Alexander J.

Statens institutt for folkehelse, Oslo.

The age adjusted incidence of cancer has increased on average 1% annually since the beginning of this century, and cancer is now one of the most prevalent causes of death. Diet is suggested to be responsible for about 30-70% of all cancer cases. The heterocyclic amines (HCA) produced during processing of meats and fish at temperatures above 150 degrees C are candidate dietary causes. Amounts in food range from less than 1 ng/g in cooked meat or fish up to over 300 ng/g in well done flame grilled chicken breast meat. The most important parameters determining HCA amounts are cooking temperature and cooking time. 20 different HCAs are identified from cooked or grilled meats and fish. HCAs are causing cancer in various organs in mice, rats and cynomolgus monkeys. It is of interest to note that in rats, PhIP, the most abundant heterocyclic amine in cooked food, causes colon, prostate and mammary cancer, which are the most prevalent cancers in humans. Epidemiological studies show a correlation between intake of red meat and colon, mammary and prostate cancer. Based on the adverse effects of HCA, a reduced intake is recommended and practical advice on how this can be done is given.

Publication Types:
Review
Review, Tutorial

PMID: 10025205 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Nutr Cancer 1998;30(3):220-6 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Feeding of a well-cooked beef diet containing a high heterocyclic amine content enhances colon and stomach carcinogenesis in 1,2-dimethylhydrazine-treated rats.

Pence BC, Landers M, Dunn DM, Shen CL, Miller MF.

Department of Pathology, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock 79430, USA. acabcp@ttuhsc.edu

Epidemiologic studies have linked the consumption of red meat and the consumption of highly browned meats containing high levels of heterocyclic aromatic amines (HCAs) to increased risk of colorectal cancer or polyps. The present study determined the effects of long-term feeding of beef-containing diets with low and high levels of HCAs (in the context of a low or high beef tallow diet) on a standard 1,2-dimethylhydrazine (DMH)-induced colon tumorigenesis protocol. Very lean beef was cooked by a variety of methods at different temperatures, and the levels of the major HCAs (2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline, 2-amino-3,4,8-trimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline, and 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-f]pyridine) were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Diets incorporating beef containing low or high levels of HCAs were fed for 12 weeks, during which DMH was administered to induce colon tumors, followed by various dietary regimens as promotional stimuli. Feeding of a beef diet high in HCAs resulted in more DMH-induced colon adenocarcinomas, but only in the context of a low-fat diet. The high-HCA diets increased stomach tumors in all DMH-treated rats. An apparent interaction of high HCA with a high fat level reduced the colon tumor incidence and tumor numbers in those diets containing both factors. These results support the epidemiologic data linking well-cooked meat to increased risk for colon and stomach cancer, but the role of dietary fat level remains puzzling.

PMID: 9631494 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



Int J Cancer 1997 Mar 28;71(1):14-9 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Risk of adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagus with meat cooking method and doneness preference.

Ward MH, Sinha R, Heineman EF, Rothman N, Markin R, Weisenburger DD, Correa P, Zahm SH.

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892-7364, USA.

Meats cooked at high temperatures (frying, grilling) and for a long duration contain heterocyclic amines (HCAs), which are both mutagens and animal carcinogens. Additionally, barbecuing/grilling of meats produces polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Consumption of well-done meat has been associated with an increased risk of colon cancer but has not been evaluated as a risk factor for stomach or esophageal cancers. We conducted a population-based case-control study in 66 counties of eastern Nebraska. Telephone interviews were conducted with white men and women diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the stomach (n = 176) and esophagus (n = 143) between July 1988 and June 1993 and 502 controls. The dietary assessment included several questions about usual cooking methods for meats and doneness preference for beef. High intake of red meat was associated with increased risks for both stomach and esophageal cancers. Overall, broiling or frying of beef, chicken or pork was not associated with the risk of these tumors. Barbecuing/grilling, reported as the usual cooking method for a small number of study participants, was associated with an elevated risk of stomach and esophageal cancers. After excluding those who reported usually barbecuing/grilling, a source of both PAHs and HCAs, we evaluated doneness level as a surrogate for HCA exposure. Compared to a preference for rare/medium rare beef, odds ratios were 2.4 for medium, 2.4 for medium well and 3.2 for well done, a significant positive trend. Doneness level was not associated with a significant trend in risk of esophageal cancer.

PMID: 9096659 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]



Cancer Causes Control 1997 Mar;8(2):175-83 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut


Meat preparation and colorectal adenomas in a large sigmoidoscopy-based case-control study in California (United States).

Probst-Hensch NM, Sinha R, Longnecker MP, Witte JS, Ingles SA, Frankl HD, Lee ER, Haile RW.

USC/Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Preventive Medicine, Los Angeles, CA 90033-0800, USA.

The often observed association between red meat and colorectal cancer could be due in part to mutagens, such as heterocyclic amines (HCA), that are present in cooked meat. HCAs are highly mutagenic and cause intestinal tumors in animals. The hypothesis that HCAs are also carcinogenic to humans remains to be substantiated in epidemiologic studies. We determined the associations of meat preparation and frequency of intake (proxy variables for HCA exposure, since HCA concentration depends on the type of meat and the way it is cooked) with the prevalence of distal colorectal adenomas in a sigmoidoscopy-based case-control study of 488 matched pairs of subjects from two California (United States) Kaiser Permanente Medical Centers. A more than twofold difference in adenoma prevalence between subjects at extreme ends of estimated HCA intake was observed. For subjects who ate red meat more than once per week, fried it more than 10 percent of the time, and ate it with a darkly browned surface, compared with subjects who ate red meat one time or less per week, fried it 10 or less percent of the time, and ate it with a lightly browned surface, the odds ratio was 2.2 (95 percent confidence interval = 1.1-4.3). Adenoma prevalence also increased with frequency of frying red meat (P trend = 0.004). These results are consistent with a carcinogenic effect of HCA.

Publication Types:
Multicenter Study

PMID: 9134241 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]


Happy reading.

[Stray]

thats alot uf werds

[Paul Stagg]

Originally posted by Juan
If the test aint blind, and there is no control group, the study is almost worthless.

Yup.

[ElPietro]

Originally posted by Paul Stagg
You make an incorrect assumption.

Read the studies.

I think as analysts we have a better understanding of how data, whether, it be empirical or not can be made to say virtually anything the author wants it to. Sometimes it amazes me at the jumps in logic that published studies make...or the exclusion of any results that would suggest anything other than the hypothesis at hand.

[Juan]

It sounds like these people were not told what the study was for. Since there is a control group, it appears that there could very well be a correlation, and the study is valid.

"In a case-control study of colorectal adenomas, cases (n = 146) were diagnosed with colorectal adenomas at sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy, and controls (n = 228) were found not to have colorectal adenomas at sigmoidoscopy"

[McBain]

i vote steak:
how many people eat steak v. how many people get ass cancer eh?

[GIS]

Muscle Milk by CytoSport, Chocolate or Vanilla blended with milk.

[Paul Stagg]

Originally posted by ElPietro


I think as analysts we have a better understanding of how data, whether, it be empirical or not can be made to say virtually anything the author wants it to. Sometimes it amazes me at the jumps in logic that published studies make...or the exclusion of any results that would suggest anything other than the hypothesis at hand.

Very true. Although a simple course in statistical analysis or something like Econometrics *should* be sufficient for most people to grasp this stuff.

Just a basic understanding of the concepts of correlation, causality, deviations, tests to determine the validity of data and the resulting conclusions... Understanding that almost everything can be expressed as a mathematical expression, and tested for truth via data sets... and what things change the measure of 'truth'.

[Juan]

Watch out for heteroskedacity! I've been wanting to use that word since my college regression analysis class.