Quillette61%

Crémieux on Fertility Collapse, Ozempic, IQ & Pit Bulls | Quillette Cetera Episode 69 73%

By Zoe Sankey94%

8/6/2026, 5:29:56 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 10 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Framing Effect, and Fundamental Attribution Error, with Halo Effect as the most egregious example at 38.1% saturation with 53 hits. Analysis detected 465 faulty-reasoning hits from 139 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 56.7% and a BS Rank of 73% (8,438 of 30,584 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 72.40% of the article peer group.

In this episode of *Quillette Cetera*, Zoe Sankey speaks with Jordan Lasker—better known by his pen name **Crémieux**—the bioinformatician and writer whose contrarian analyses of genetics, demographics and medicine have drawn a following of hundreds of thousands on X. 
They discuss why birth rates across the Anglosphere began falling after a Victorian obscenity trial, what Crémieux makes of the evidence on GLP-1 drugs like Ozempic and the panic over microplastics, and his own experience being mauled by a pit bull—which, he argues, is a question of nature, not nurture. 
They also turn to El Salvador's transformation under Nayib Bukele, IQ testing and embryo selection, the tangle of politics and personality, free will, and the strange business of being Jewish and atheist at once. 
## Transcript 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 10.6%Quillette: 4.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.4%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 36.0%Zoe Sankey: 5.5%Quillette: 2.3%Availability Heuristic36.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.4%Quillette: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.4%Quillette: 1.1%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.5%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 36.0%Zoe Sankey: 25.0%Quillette: 5.0%Framing Effect36.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.9%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.4%Quillette: 1.1%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 11.3%Quillette: 6.4%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.7%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 36.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.7%Quillette: 1.2%Fundamental Attribution Error36.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.4%Quillette: 1.2%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 4.9%Quillette: 1.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 38.1%Zoe Sankey: 4.9%Quillette: 1.7%Halo Effect38.1%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 1.4%Quillette: 0.7%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.4%Quillette: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 28.1%Zoe Sankey: 14.8%Quillette: 3.5%Appeal to Authority28.1%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 10.0%Quillette: 2.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.4%Quillette: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 36.0%Zoe Sankey: 26.0%Quillette: 7.2%Hasty Generalization36.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 28.1%Zoe Sankey: 2.1%Quillette: 0.4%Bandwagon28.1%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 6.1%Quillette: 2.8%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.6%Quillette: 0.9%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 36.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.7%Quillette: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)36.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 2.7%Quillette: 0.4%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.5%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 36.0%Zoe Sankey: 7.3%Quillette: 2.2%Anecdotal36.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.6%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.0%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 24.5%Zoe Sankey: 16.5%Quillette: 9.8%Biased Writer Voice24.5%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 1.0%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 8.1%Quillette: 1.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Zoe Sankey: 0.0%Quillette: 0.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

139 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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