NationStates Jolt Archive

A VERY important question. If a piece of meat falls on the floor of my room, does the five second rule apply or is it automatically expanded to like twenty seconds?

3 seconds, it's the three second rule any longer and it would be, well dirty"!

That would depend greatly on various factors including but not limited to: How clean your room is, how durable your immune system is, how much you'll enjoy the meat and who is watching at the time. *nod*

My room's cleansliness is difficult to define, since it has a lot of empty coke bottles, but is generally clean in terms of dust. On the other hand, the meat is REALLY good. I ate it, but this is more for future reference in case this travesty ever occurs again.

yay for mythbusters.

as soon as it hits, its dirty.

the risk is up for you to take.

I'd eat it, it can't be any dirtier than our (ugh) work surfaces in our kitchen.

I'd eat it, it can't be any dirtier than our (ugh) work surfaces in our kitchen.

You should see my kitchen at home; it's normally clean, but we're lazy and the oil jumps everywhere and it takes us a while to realize we need to clean it. The good thing is that it's an electric kitchen, so cleaning it just requires a sponge and a special product.

yay for mythbusters.

Before the Mythbusters ever came along with their study, a study of the five second rule had already been published in a scientific journal. In fact Harvard University would honor their research with the prestigious Ig Nobel Prize for Public Health a year before the Myth Busters "Busted" it

If it still tastes good, go for it.

Depends what kind of meat...

For example, I wouldn't suggest trying to eat savoury mince. However, if you are more partial to dropping steak or something more solid, Go for it...

Also, Is it carpet or flat floor? Carpet will make it all hairy...

Well I am not exactly OCD about hygiene but I draw the line at eating something off the floor.

Well I am not exactly OCD about hygiene but I draw the line at eating something off the floor.

Heheh so you wouldn't drink cider?

honestly it doesn't matter as long as it doesn't have loads of crap on it and its something of solid shape unlike say mashed potato

half an hour rule I'd say applies after that its slightly creepy

I'm reminded of a poem I learned as a child.

God made dirt and dirt don't hurt
If I die, then God knows why.

Heheh so you wouldn't drink cider?

It is okay if it has enough alcohol in it to kill all known lifeforms.

Before the Mythbusters ever came along with their study, a study of the five second rule had already been published in a scientific journal. In fact Harvard University would honor their research with the prestigious Ig Nobel Prize for Public Health a year before the Myth Busters "Busted" it

While the Discovery Channel isn't watched in as many numbers as larger networks, it is seen by several orders of magnitude more people than the unspecified "scientific journal" you "mentioned".

Mythbusters is an effective show in that it takes misconceptions that may have been explained in a "scientific journal" with microscopic readerships and broadcasts them being debunked to a much wider audience...and does so in a way that makes you far more likely to remember the results.

Plus, Kari Byron is adorably hot.

So back off the high horse, Granny. Does it really matter how the knowledge is distributed so long as it IS distributed and the myth is exploded?

It's five.

While the Discovery Channel isn't watched in as many numbers as larger networks, it is seen by several orders of magnitude more people than the unspecified "scientific journal" you "mentioned".

Mythbusters is an effective show in that it takes misconceptions that may have been explained in a "scientific journal" with microscopic readerships and broadcasts them being debunked to a much wider audience...and does so in a way that makes you far more likely to remember the results.

Plus, Kari Byron is adorably hot.

So back off the high horse, Granny. Does it really matter how the knowledge is distributed so long as it IS distributed and the myth is exploded?


Oi oi lay of poor old granny, anybody who chugs mead is okay in my book!

However, if you are more partial to dropping steak

Steak, of course!

Also, Is it carpet or flat floor? Carpet will make it all hairy...

No, it's tile, but it's not necessarilly better; tile also tends to collect more dust and not absorb it.

Oi oi lay of poor old granny, anybody who chugs mead is okay in my book!

And anyone who dismisses a television show because it's not a "scientific journal" is in need of RBRS (rectal baton removal surgery).

While the Discovery Channel isn't watched in as many numbers as larger networks, it is seen by several orders of magnitude more people than the unspecified "scientific journal" you "mentioned".

Mythbusters is an effective show in that it takes misconceptions that may have been explained in a "scientific journal" with microscopic readerships and broadcasts them being debunked to a much wider audience...and does so in a way that makes you far more likely to remember the results.

Plus, Kari Byron is adorably hot.

So back off the high horse, Granny. Does it really matter how the knowledge is distributed so long as it IS distributed and the myth is exploded?

You managed to say a lot just to get the point across that Kari Byron is hot

Depends on how much you dropped: if it was a really small piece, I'd probably just toss it away.

And anyone who dismisses a television show because it's not a "scientific journal" is in need of RBRS (rectal baton removal surgery).

Did I dismiss is, when did I do that? I recall no such occurrence. All I remember saying was that somebody had done it first and got an award for it. If you consider that a dismissal, fine I can deal with that, but the rest of your statement has absolutely no justification.

It really depends on what food you drop on what floor.
If it is a steak on a relatively clean tile floor, give it a rinse off and sear it. A quick rinse and wiping it off, followed by cooking it, will get rid of anything it may have picked up from the floor.

Carpet is questionable due to the fuzzies, but not a big deal.

If it falls after having been cooked (and you dont want to give it a quick return to the flame), then you are on your own as far as bacterial contamination.

Depends on how much you dropped: if it was a really small piece, I'd probably just toss it away.

It's difficult to quantify how small of a piece it has to be to justify throwing a piece of steak away; this was really good steak.

Also, Is it carpet or flat floor? Carpet will make it all hairy...

**Insert Hairy Meat Joke Here**

I don't follow the five second rule, ever. It depends instead on three factors: how clean the floor is, how self-contained the food is, and whether or not it rolls. If a skittle falls on the floor in the living room, I'll eat it. The living room is very clean and skittles have a hard shell you can brush off. If something likely to have stuff stick to it rolls under my desk, that's a hell no.

It is okay if it has enough alcohol in it to kill all known lifeforms.

I think you might want to rethink that LOL

Did I dismiss is, when did I do that? I recall no such occurrence. All I remember saying was that somebody had done it first and got an award for it. If you consider that a dismissal, fine I can deal with that, but the rest of your statement has absolutely no justification.

I see, so you don't consider...

Before the Mythbusters ever came along with their study, a study of the five second rule had already been published in a scientific journal. In fact Harvard University would honor their research with the prestigious Ig Nobel Prize for Public Health a year before the Myth Busters "Busted" it.

...to be dismissive? Fair enough. Usually, making a point of who cited something first and then attaching quotation marks to the latter citer's trademark phrase comes off as being dismissive. That's how I read your post. If that was not your intention, I apologize.

If that was your intention and you're using indignation to deflect my catching you at snobbery, then I applaud you, 'cause that was pretty good indignation.

Well, if it has hair/dirt or sand/all three on it then don't eat it. And don't eat it if people who don't like you are watching unless you're prepared to smile bravely.

The more delicious the food, the longer it can be left on the floor before being eaten.

If that was not your intention, I apologize.

My only intention was to inform people that others have done research before Mythbusters. Lets just consider the matter closed.

I thought it was seven seconds? That's how i remember it.

I don't know if anyone said that, but a recent study showed that bacterias won't increase in population unless it touched the floor for at least 30 seconds. 25 seconds is, health-wise, safe.

Now if you like to taste dust, that's your own thing.

Why eat something that has been on the floor anyway?

USA Today reported a study that said food is edible off the floor for up to three hours unless it's wet or has sauce, in which case it is immediately inedible.

Did I dismiss is, when did I do that? I recall no such occurrence. All I remember saying was that somebody had done it first and got an award for it. If you consider that a dismissal, fine I can deal with that, but the rest of your statement has absolutely no justification.

Okay, this argument is stupid on both sides:

1) Yes, the experiment had been done before. MythBusters probably didn't know that, however, and did it again. Either way, the results were the same. MythBusters just got it to a wider audience.

2) MCG didn't dismiss MythBusters as worthless. I think everybody was misled by the quotations around the word busted, making it seem as if she was saying the MythBusters were frauds.

3) For those who maligned the MythBusters, they are real scientists. Read their bios on the homepage. They're great scientists who happen to be charismatic.

4) No, it doesn't matter, but for the record, Kari IS hot.

So Mead Chugging Granny and the MythBusters supporters, lay off it. Harvard and MythBusters both got the same results in the same experiment. Both of you are right, so get over who's better.