Mar 11, 2019





New Data Analyses on the RGMP: Blood Type & Sleeping Position

Our online survey form has been receiving submissions from RGMP experiencers since June 2015. When the 1st edition of the RGMP Dossier (see button in right-hand column of this page) was assembled, this website's investigation team had one year's worth of data. Now, we have over three.

The commonly requested Blood Type of experiencers comparison, and Sleeping Position to Mark Location on Body correlation are the two main topics discussed in this Analysis set.
_____________

Excerpt is a teaser!
________

Mark Location on Body Compared with Sleeping Position...

This set had a few highly significant trends. The most immediately obvious to me as I was tallying was the number of back marks correlating to stomach sleepers. According to the National Sleep Foundation and Chris Idzikowski’s research, stomach sleepers are the least common among the four major sleep positions [Fetal=41%, Side (Log=15% + Yearner=13%) 28%, Back (Soldier=8% + Starfish=5%) 13%, Stomach=7%]. Yet, out of the 92 responses to “What position were you [sleeping] when the mark appeared?” a whopping 20 (21.7%) suggested sleeping on their stomachs.

Bar Chart 2. Mark Location on Body & Sleeping Position #s (grouped by body part)
1. https://www.sleep.org/articles/best-sleep-position/

To read more, purchase this $2 INSERT separate from its eventual release in the upcoming RGMP Dossier, 2nd Edition by following the button below.

Purchase

3 comments :

  1. The innovation has positively improved, and servers are more averse to come up short, however in any case these frameworks additionally come up short. ExcelR Data Science Courses

    ReplyDelete
  2. Superb! Your blog is incredible. I am delighted with it, Knowledge giving Article! I appreciate you. I completely agree with you. If we talk about current scenario then it is must be update. You can also avail more information at Ultra Thin Pillow Pancake. I enjoyed reading. Thanks for sharing with me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete