(You know, they say 42.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot.)

This year, while watching politicians racing around trying to out-slime each other, I’ve been struck by their ability to turn statistics into schizophrenics. It’s scary, but it’s fun to watch – a politician can make a four swear it’s a five, or a three, or a five again, and do it while simultaneously kissing babies, straddling fences, and going all Artful Dodger on your wallet.

Now before you get antsy, know that this is not a piece about politics. Well, at least not directly. Every year, it seems, politics creeps a little bit closer to the rest of us, over here out of the spotlight, futilely yelling, “No! We’re just fine, thanks. Go make a bridge or something. Invade somebody, whatever. Really, we’re just fine. But thanks for asking!”

Someone famous once said, “All politics is local.” Of course, someone else once said, “Hey, babe, be a dear and play ‘Helter Skelter’ again while I carve a swastika on my forehead,” and he was famous, too. But let’s not get sidetracked on J. Edgar Hoover’s senior prom.

As you probably know, that “All politics is local” quote is attributed to the famous statesman and former live person, Tip O’Neill, who regrettably passed away before telling anybody what the heck it meant. Grettably, though, the quote seems quite close in spirit to “All sewage is local,” a phrase coined by my sister’s cousin’s half-brother, the highly respected Tony One-Lip. Tony is our local Commissioner of Cement Projects, Garbage Pickup, and In-Law Vetting, as well as the owner of Sinistro Amico, a ‘rapid response’ service agency. (“Car-Trunk Steam Cleaning, While You Wait!”)

Politics: if you got the pearls, we got the swine.

But that’s not for today. No, today, we’re here to talk about issues of import. Things that may affect us on a multi-generational level. The great topics of the ages. To wit:

Statistics as a bellwether of our society
The importance of unbiased baselines in non-manipulative probability and its potential interplay with the Central Limit Theorem
Whole milk

Like me, you might be surprised, initially, at the sheer volume of statistics available online about a topic as pedestrian as milk. But remember where we are – and when we are: we live in 21st century America, where “OMG LOL” is a complete sentence, and people have American Idol’s phone number on speed dial. And if that’s not an argument for steadily increasing levels of mandated medication, I don’t know much.

So let’s dive into milk. (sorry) In 2005, Americans drank 2.7 billion gallons of milk. (The latest data we could find was for 2005; apparently, that’s the last time Al Gore updated the internet.) By the way, one gallon of milk weighs 8.6 pounds, in case you’re planning to bring a few gallons on the plane as carry-on luggage, and with my luck, you’ll have the seat next to me.

Young boys tend to drink milk 10% more often than girls, which is why it’s called a “milk moustache” instead of, say, a “milk lip-gloss spritz.” And 9.1% of you out there drink an entire gallon of milk every single day. (Not only will you be seated next to me on the plane; you’ll be in the window seat.)

FUN FACTOID: One milk-based site offered a handy list of links to other on-topic websites. One of the milk-related topics? Corrective lenses. Apparently, chugging a whole gallon of milk a day can not only make you go often, it can make you go blind. Which puts a whole new spin on “lactose-intolerant.”

Just next door to milk on the food chain is cheese. In 1909, Americans nibbled just north of 3 pounds of cheese per person, per year. By 2001, we were up to 30 pounds of cheese a year. At this rate, by 2050, we’ll all be George Wendt. Homeland Security is looking into the problem, and Congress has summoned several of the usual suspects to appear and testify, including Domino’s Pizza, that Sargento guy, and Little Miss Muffet.

FUN FACTOID: This massive bloat (sorry) in cheese consumption also led directly to me creating several dairy-product-related jokes, none of which I’m proud of.

Nationally, we’re no better with butter, either. In 2004 (the last year anybody’s cholesterol was low enough to allow for running around, counting stuff), we collectively spread 1,353,000,000,000 pounds of the stuff on stuff. That statistic alone ought to make you proud to be an American, or two. But count those zeroes – that’s 1.35 billion pounds of butter, scooped and dolloped onto biscuits, gravy, corn, and, for all I know, other butter. After all, to reach that rate of consumption, we could’ve been slathering lard on carport walls, pets, and Tip O’Neill.

People are just getting larger and larger; in fact, according to a recent survey, 2 out of 3 people are now 3 out of 4 people.

They’ve even come up with a new word to describe American over-eating, and all its attendant medical problems: Diabesity.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Diabesity! Because sometimes, gluttony just isn’t enough.

There is a side-order (sorry) of good news, a bit of bright-ish lining. We’re eating more fish, according to statistics. But you can’t really trust some of these reports. A footnote points out that the numbers exclude “edible fishery products consumed in Puerto Rico,” but include tuna caught by foreign vessels in American Samoa.

Yes. You heard me correctly. That’s what we’re getting for our tax dollars – we’re paying all-growed-up adults to count tuna fish sandwiches. Undocumented Samoan tuna fish sandwiches.

But now let’s walk past the food (sorry) and study some other statistics, like crime. In 2009, according to US Census numbers, 1,000 males were arrested for the nebulous-sounding crime of ‘suspicion.’ (No females were arrested for suspicion in 2009. I don’t know why, but I’m willing to bet lip gloss was involved.)

So a thousand guys were run in for suspicion. But on the same report, in the ‘Totals’ category for the same offense, the number somehow swells (sorry) to 1,600. That can only mean one thing: those guys not only got fatter- they got fatter while the report was being written. Maybe they were arrested for suspicion of switching to whole milk.

FUN FACTOID: According to crime statistics, if you’re an Alaskan native, you are 45 times less likely to be a runaway then the rest of us. Maybe it’s too cold. Maybe there’s something about moose meat that they’re not telling us down here.

If you live in the South, statistics say you’re 14% more likely to smoke pot, but if you live in the West, you’re 36% more likely to get popped for cocaine. In fact, in California, your chances of getting arrested for possession of an “other dangerous narcotic drug” are four times higher (sorry) than the rest of us. This condition is what is known in behavioral science classes as a “critical social meltdown,” and to residents of Malibu as a “buffet.”

And speaking of drugs, the number of arrests for methamphetamine between the years 2000 and 2009 has dropped by 35%. However, the amount of meth seized in those less-frequent arrests has gone up by 75%. And if that’s not a testament to workplace efficiencies in the American capitalist model, I don’t know much.

And then there are the statistics that are simply confounding. Interestingly, and I use that term with a straight face, Americans import less timber than before, but we also export less timber. And I don’t think I have to tell you what that means: the analysis is indisputable. As a country, we’re simply eating less wood.

Be prepared, though, as you surf statistics, for some disappointments. For example, the most current timber industry numbers for Western hemlock stumpage prices (as expressed in constant dollars) are not available. Douglas fir stumpage prices have gone missing, too. Downright sloppy, is what it is. As taxpayers, we have a right to expect more. Perhaps our Justice Department will look into it, as soon as they get out of prison.

FUN FACTOID: To be honest, I really didn’t lose a lot of sleep brooding over those missing hemlock numbers. But if you think I’m gonna miss an opportunity to say “stumpage prices,” you don’t know much.