REPORT: Children Who Bite Candy Canes Into Makeshift Shanks 86% More Likely to Be Named Zack

A recent report from the research institute at Fordham University shows that children who bite their candy canes into makeshift shanks are 86% more likely to be named “Zack”.


“This is a strictly statistical finding, and should be understood as such,” says Dr. Jada Young. “When it comes to children who suck and bite and otherwise wittle this seasonal treat into fearsome shanks, you also have your Haydens, your Fatimas, your Audreys. But Zacks are really leading the pack here, and that is because Zack is a name of violence.”


The finding is a culmination of decades of research that controls for trends in baby names and years where Beyond Scared Straight was especially popular on A&E.


“Compared to their not-named-Zack peers, Zacks are disproportionately likely to fashion their candy canes into whetted spears, and then threaten other children with them, or aggressively poke their own tongues with the tip, depending what kind of freak they are,” Dr. Young explains.


“When it comes to causation versus correlation, no determinate statement can be made,” Dr. Young adds. “But it is worth noting that Zachs with and H are only as likely as Emmas, Hakeems, and Jennifers, which is to say, not exceptionally so.”


“I think it’s just something about the hard C-K that makes them a little wrong, if you will,” says Dr. Young. “But there’s no evidence to suggest that these young Zacks will remain bloodthirsty and sus in adolescence or adulthood, yet.”


Some experts have taken issue with the methods and framing of the study.


“To be honest, this report is dangerously misguided,” says Dr. Zachary Belt. “The researchers seem to have made no effort to look for underlying causes for this correlation, and have been dubiously opaque about their data gathering methods.”


“And please know I am not saying this because of what my name is,” Dr. Zack adds. “Seriously, this is just bad research. It’s irresponsible and degrades the standards of the field. I went to Stanford, okay? I’m saying this as a detached authority.”


Obviously a biased and virtually meaningless perspective, but interesting all the same.



“One solution to this problem would be to stop naming children Zack, which rhymes with ‘attack’ and makes chaos,” says Dr. Young. “But on the other hand, maybe as a society we can positively harness the innate terror of Zacks; send them to war – I don’t know!”


“Anyway, I’m looking forward to continuing this important research,” she adds. “Next we’re looking into why little white girls with boy names are always sucking on their hair.”