Speaker summary
43% 53 analyzed articles/videos 1,492.333 analyzed words
BS Summary: These Food and Drug Administration results contain 26 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation) , Framing Effect , and Negativity Bias , with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 15.1% saturation with 319.541 hits . Analysis detected 2,851.256 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,492.333 analyzed words across 53 articles, generating a BS Score of 3.6% and a BS Rank of 2% (26,630 of 26,913 speakers). This Food and Drug Administration is better (less manipulative) than 98.90% of the peer group. Food and Drug Administration
Speaker details
Total words: 1,492.333
Article count: 53
Authors
Ranking context Position among analyzed speakers
1% percentile 0 25 50 75 100 1.1% percentile 3.6% BS Score53 analyzed videos1.5K analyzed words
Reasoning profile Selected profile versus the sitewide rate
Highest rates Largest gaps
Shared scale 0–50%
0.0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Framing Effect Sitewide 26.9% Speaker 6.1% 6.1% Appeal to Emotion Sitewide 15.9% Speaker 1.0% 1.0% Negativity Bias Sitewide 19.2% Speaker 5.9% 5.9% Indoctrination Sitewide 0.0% Speaker 12.6% 12.6% Availability Heuristic Sitewide 9.1% Speaker 1.6% 1.6% Hasty Generalization Sitewide 8.1% Speaker 1.1% 1.1% Halo Effect Sitewide 6.7% Speaker 0.5% 0.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation) Sitewide 0.8% Speaker 7.0% 7.0% Appeal to Authority Sitewide 11.1% Speaker 15.1% 15.1% Unattributed Quote Sitewide 1.1% Speaker 4.7% 4.7% Sitewide departure map Above the diagonal means this profile uses the pattern more often
0.0% 0.0% 10% 10% 20% 20% 30% 30% 40% 40% 50% 50% Framing Effect: Speaker 6.1%, sitewide 26.9% Negativity Bias: Speaker 5.9%, sitewide 19.2% Appeal to Emotion: Speaker 1.0%, sitewide 15.9% Appeal to Authority: Speaker 15.1%, sitewide 11.1% Indoctrination: Speaker 12.6%, sitewide 0.0% Availability Heuristic: Speaker 1.6%, sitewide 9.1% Hasty Generalization: Speaker 1.1%, sitewide 8.1% Confirmation Bias: Speaker 8.0%, sitewide 7.5% Ambiguity (Equivocation): Speaker 7.0%, sitewide 0.8% Halo Effect: Speaker 0.5%, sitewide 6.7% Optimism Bias: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 6.0% Biased Writer Voice: Speaker 2.9%, sitewide 5.3% Unattributed Quote: Speaker 4.7%, sitewide 1.1% Overconfidence Bias: Speaker 4.1%, sitewide 4.6% Anchoring Bias: Speaker 1.6%, sitewide 4.0% Self-Serving Bias: Speaker 0.3%, sitewide 3.7% Burden of Proof: Speaker 3.2%, sitewide 0.4% Recency Bias: Speaker 2.3%, sitewide 2.7% Loss Aversion: Speaker 2.7%, sitewide 2.5% Quote-first Misdirection: Speaker 2.5%, sitewide 0.0% Status Quo Bias: Speaker 1.3%, sitewide 2.2% Begging the Question: Speaker 2.1%, sitewide 1.7% Attempt to Sell a Product or Service: Speaker 1.6%, sitewide 0.5% False Dilemma: Speaker 0.6%, sitewide 1.5% Framing Effect Sitewide rate Speaker rate Analyzed articles and videos Sort by Most recent Article rank - best Article rank - worst