Margaritas and adderall can add inches to your height and years to your life*
By Ashley Munteanu · June 17, 2026
This is a satirical article. A fictional survey claims that Margaritas and adderall can add inches to your height and years to your life. According to invented data, about 67 percent of margaritas fit the finding. No real research was conducted.
Experts are calling it a turning point, or were going to until lunch. A recent survey indicates that Margaritas and adderall can add inches to your height and years to your life.
Drawing on a sample the researchers described as "more than enough," the work pegs the effect at about 67 percent and declines to elaborate further.
Colleagues in adjacent fields called the result "interesting if true," which the authors have chosen to take as praise.
The stakes, the authors insist, could not be higher, although they were unable to say what the stakes actually are.
The question of margaritas has troubled thinkers for as long as there has been a slow afternoon. Earlier attempts to study it were abandoned, mostly out of boredom, leaving the field wide open for a bolder, less careful generation.
For decades the prevailing wisdom held the opposite of whatever this survey found. That wisdom was based on nothing in particular, which is precisely what makes it so difficult to dislodge.
Public interest in margaritas has historically peaked around dinner parties and dropped sharply whenever facts are introduced. The survey was designed to ride the former and avoid the latter.
The study, conducted by the Northwestern Center for Suggestive Data, drew on 6,270 responses and one very strong hunch.
To ensure rigor, every figure was reviewed by the person who produced it, who found no problems. The margin of error was set at within acceptable bounds of wishful thinking and then quietly ignored.
| Sample size | 6,270 margaritas |
|---|---|
| Margin of error | within acceptable bounds of wishful thinking |
| Institution | The Northwestern Center for Suggestive Data |
| Published in | The International Ledger of Made-Up Metrics |
| Funding | A grant from a company that sells the thing in question |
Raw numbers were lost in a reformatting incident but are remembered fondly and described here from memory.
of cases, allegedly
As the chart makes unavoidable, the largest share of respondents fell squarely into the pattern, with 67 percent landing exactly where the authors hoped they would.
What the figure lacks in axes it makes up for in confidence. The bulk of the sample, some 67 percent, behaved exactly as the headline required.
The research community responded with the measured enthusiasm of people who were not asked to check the math.
A leading voice in the study of margaritas framed the result in historic terms.
We were as surprised as anyone. The data on margaritas simply poured out.
The expert then declined to take questions, citing a prior commitment to certainty.
Pressed on whether the finding could be trusted, an expert offered reassurance and very little else.
For years people assumed otherwise. This study puts that comfortable assumption about margaritas to rest.
Colleagues nearby nodded, partly in agreement and partly because the room was warm.
Asked to explain the 67 percent figure, a senior researcher leaned back and spoke slowly.
Is it peer reviewed? No. Is it compelling? Also no. But here we are.
No follow up was offered, and none, the authors felt, was strictly necessary.
One scholar, who has built a reputation on saying things firmly, did not disappoint.
The beauty of this finding is that it cannot be disproven, because we will not allow it to be tested.
The statement has since been printed, framed, and cited by the person who made it.
On the street, reaction was immediate and almost entirely unbothered by the absence of evidence.
“I read about margaritas once, somewhere, probably. This tracks completely.”
A man eating lunch nearby
“I do not know what to believe anymore, but I believe this, and I believe it loudly.”
A woman walking three dogs
“A number that high? That feels right to me. I have always trusted numbers that feel right.”
A teenager on a skateboard
What does it all mean? The authors are glad you asked, and gladder still that you cannot check.
For industry, the finding arrives like a gift. Entire product lines may now be justified by a single number, and several already are. Marketing departments have been advised to cite the survey before anyone notices the asterisk.
On a human level, the implications for margaritas touch us all, or at least touch the kind of person who shares this sort of thing. We may never look at margaritas the same way, mostly because we were not looking very closely to begin with.
Educators have already begun working the 67 percent figure into lesson plans, where it will calcify into common knowledge within a generation. By then its origins will be safely forgotten, as is tradition.
Critics may argue that acting on an unsourced figure is unwise. The authors counter that society has been doing precisely that for centuries, and look how well things are going.
The authors wish to acknowledge a handful of limitations, which they have arranged from least to most disqualifying.
- 1. No control group was used, on the grounds that it would have slowed everyone down.
- 2. Causation and correlation were treated as interchangeable throughout, for ease of writing.
- 3. The sample may not be representative of anything, including itself.
- 4. Several key terms were defined after the results were known, to ensure a good fit.
- 5. Findings should not be cited, acted upon, repeated at dinner, or believed under any circumstances.
These limitations notwithstanding, the authors stand firmly behind the headline and nothing else.