Epidemiologist’s Warning: STOP Buying Bagged Salad for Now ⁠74%

By Jonathan Cohn⁠86%

7/13/2026, 11:42:22 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 13 faulty reasoning types, including Pessimism Bias, Negativity Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 67.5% saturation with 52 hits. Analysis detected 336 faulty-reasoning hits from 77 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 66.2% and a BS Rank of ⁠74% (5,546 of 21,152 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.80% of the article peer group.

Jonathan Cohn talks with epidemiologist Katelyn Jetelina about the record-breaking cyclospora outbreak, which foods to avoid, why officials still haven’t found the source, and how cuts to public health could make outbreaks like this more common. 
As always: Watch, listen, and leave a comment. 
Bulwark+ Takes is home to short videos, livestreams, and event archives exclusively for Bulwark+ members. 
Add Bulwark+ Takes feed to your player of choice, here. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 6.3%The Bulwark: 5.7%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 46.8%Jonathan Cohn: 13.3%The Bulwark: 3.0%Availability Heuristic46.8%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.6%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 2.9%The Bulwark: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 10.4%Jonathan Cohn: 24.0%The Bulwark: 6.9%Framing Effect10.4%This article: 10.4%Jonathan Cohn: 0.8%The Bulwark: 0.6%Loss Aversion10.4%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.6%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 57.1%Jonathan Cohn: 7.2%The Bulwark: 2.3%Pessimism Bias57.1%This article: 57.1%Jonathan Cohn: 32.8%The Bulwark: 11.4%Negativity Bias57.1%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 19.5%Jonathan Cohn: 4.0%The Bulwark: 3.0%In-Group Bias19.5%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 2.5%The Bulwark: 1.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.1%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.4%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.6%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 3.3%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.8%Straw Man0.0%This article: 46.8%Jonathan Cohn: 20.7%The Bulwark: 3.5%Appeal to Authority46.8%This article: 10.4%Jonathan Cohn: 0.8%The Bulwark: 2.3%False Dilemma10.4%This article: 46.8%Jonathan Cohn: 7.0%The Bulwark: 1.0%Slippery Slope46.8%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 6.0%The Bulwark: 8.4%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.6%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.5%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 10.4%Jonathan Cohn: 8.3%The Bulwark: 5.8%Appeal to Emotion10.4%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.4%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 2.2%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.9%The Bulwark: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 14.6%The Bulwark: 2.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 0.0%The Bulwark: 1.4%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 67.5%Jonathan Cohn: 34.4%The Bulwark: 15.4%Biased Writer Voice67.5%This article: 10.4%Jonathan Cohn: 3.3%The Bulwark: 2.8%Indoctrination10.4%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 12.2%The Bulwark: 5.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Jonathan Cohn: 2.5%The Bulwark: 0.6%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 42.9%Jonathan Cohn: 10.6%The Bulwark: 4.2%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…42.9%

77 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker32%attributed speech52writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 36 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageBulwark+ Takes • 15 words • 100.0% coverageBulwark+ Takes • 10 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

Bulwark+ Takes

100%flagged-word coverage
25 attributed words100% of attributed speech100% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice-100.0 ptsWriter: 100.0%Bulwark+ Takes: 0.0%0.0%Attempt to Sell a Product +84.6 ptsWriter: 15.4%Bulwark+ Takes: 100.0%100.0%Indoctrination-15.4 ptsWriter: 15.4%Bulwark+ Takes: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.