Fitness and Nutrition, Rep VII

[DramaticGloveSave]

I just looked at the last study.

1) Their abstract report that LDL cholesterol increased, without reporting that HDL cholesterol increased by a similar percentage. See Table 2.

2) They tested for the effects of cholesterol by adding eggs to the diets of subjects, rather than replacing something in their diet with eggs. So total caloric consumption rose by up to 1,000 calories a day.

Where do you find this ****?

That is a stickied thread on the best nutrition discussion on the internet.

 

[covfefe]

 

[Andrei79]

It’s more the links that you should pay attention to lol. Point is, if you don’t believe dietary cholesterol negatively impacts your risk factor for CVD... you’re the one going against scientific consensus.

Point is this is why I never both responding seriously to you. I take my time to answer respectfully and I get this vapid response.

So, you can't actually say or argue anything about the subject ? Understood. Moving on, as usual.

 

[Andrei79]

Apparently, the new ICD based itself on Reddit.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

Point is this is why I never both responding seriously to you. I take my time to answer respectfully and I get this vapid response.

So, you can't actually say or argue anything about the subject ? Understood. Moving on, as usual.

You litterally said you weren’t going to respond in the post I was quoting. What the heck was I supposed to respond with?

 

[Mrb1p]

I don't know if you've notice, but the mean IQ and general capacity to reason in here is pretty high.

I actually emailed one of the top Canadian biostatisticians, a friend of mine, to ask her about this study. She is the actual "avant-garde" as you call it. She is also a vegetarian who does not eat eggs.

As I wrote, she made more or less the same critiques as the posters in here.

Though to be honest, I think that the similarity would break if the science were of higher quality.

TBH, DGS tanks the IQ by a good bit by himself, and that "I get laid" dude too.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

TBH, DGS tanks the IQ by a good bit by himself, and that "I get laid" dude too.

sorry for constantly disrupting your circle jerk of ignorance.

 

[Mrb1p]

sorry for constantly disrupting your circle jerk of ignorance.

You don't disrupt much, man.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

You don't disrupt much, man.

Truest statement you've ever said in this thread

 

[Paddyjack]

Not doing that at all. It was merely a response to your claiming to be a scientist. And it wasn't aimed at you specifically. I have no idea of your bona fides.

There are unscrupulous people in every walk of life, even at the very highest levels - including science.

As has been pointed out admirably by others, the financial benefactor of the study in discussion is also the underwriter of the study. It's common sense to suggest they'd know what they were getting beforehand.

Multinational pharmaceutical patent fiefdoms are not known for their humanistic endeavors outweighing their pursuit of profit.

Which was exactly my initial point. That is how we get our study funded. We expect a type of results based on preliminary data, we contact the interested company and get the money. Not the other way around.

But eh, whatever, when I see comments like this, it reminds me of Moon Landing conspirationists "Bah, these pictures are from NASA, obvious photoshop".

 

[groovejuice]

Which was exactly my initial point. That is how we get our study funded. We expect a type of results based on preliminary data, we contact the interested company and get the money. Not the other way around.

But eh, whatever, when I see comments like this, it reminds me of Moon Landing conspirationists "Bah, these pictures are from NASA, obvious photoshop".

There's clearly a difference between independent studies financed, say, by grants with oversight, and studies underwritten by corporations who have an enormous financial stake in the outcome.

 

[Mike Mike Caron]

I don't know if you've notice, but the mean IQ and general capacity to reason in here is pretty high.

I actually emailed one of the top Canadian biostatisticians, a friend of mine, to ask her about this study. She is the actual "avant-garde" as you call it. She is also a vegetarian who does not eat eggs.

As I wrote, she made more or less the same critiques as the posters in here.

Though to be honest, I think that the similarity would break if the science were of higher quality.

No, I haven't noticed.

 

[Kriss E]

Ya? And did you not see the video exposing how they manipulated the data? What data was manipulated in the egg study I posted?

That study is more of a poll than anything scientific.

 

[Kriss E]

You don't disrupt much, man.

Hey man...his gf is a nutritionist!

 

[Mrb1p]

Hey man...his gf is a nutritionist!

Holistic nutritionist*

She basically got her title in a cereal box.

Vegan, bio and low fat granola box.

 

[DramaticGloveSave]

makes way more money than either of you meatheads that’s for sure lol

 

[Kriss E]

makes way more money than either of you meatheads that’s for sure lol

wow...you're so cool broooo!

 

[Mrb1p]

makes way more money than either of you meatheads that’s for sure lol

Makes more money than a student? Damn, so succesful.

 

[DAChampion]

A quick Google search reveals that the typical salary of a holistic nutritionist is ~$55,000/year.

It's hardly investment banking.

DGS's point is also irrelevant, as lots of people make tons of money from fraudulent work. The correlation between annual salary and value of labour is an imperfect one.

At the other end, I don't expect @Mrb1p to end up rich. He might, but in general the restaurant industry is an example of market failure.

 

[DAChampion]

Which was exactly my initial point. That is how we get our study funded. We expect a type of results based on preliminary data, we contact the interested company and get the money. Not the other way around.

But eh, whatever, when I see comments like this, it reminds me of Moon Landing conspirationists "Bah, these pictures are from NASA, obvious photoshop".

If you "expect" a certain result then you are not doing real science. See philosophy 101.

Recently, somebody who thinks like you was managing a large study on the health effects of alcohol consumption. He then went to the booze companies, implied to them that he wanted to show that moderate alcohol consumption was healthy, and asked them for funding.

Do you seriously not understand why this was a scandal?

Spoiler: He was fired.

 

[Paddyjack]

If you "expect" a certain result then you are not doing real science. See philosophy 101.

Recently, somebody who thinks like you was managing a large study on the health effects of alcohol consumption. He then went to the booze companies, implied to them that he wanted to show that moderate alcohol consumption was healthy, and asked them for funding.

Do you seriously not understand why this was a scandal?

Spoiler: He was fired.

LMAO. Seriously man.

You think agencies or industry give fundings out of thin air? That I walk to them and say, hey I'm going to do this, give me money, pretty please... so when I say expect results, it is because before I contacted them I ran preliminary studies on a smaller sample size. Seriously, why do you think there are phase 1, phase 2 phase 3 etc?? Do you know the difference in costs between phase 1 and 2?? MILLIONS. You think someone would give that kind of money without having seen results of the preliminary phase?? Get real.

If I want to make a long term study on the benefits of vaccine, do I contact a dairy company or a pharma? Obviously, the pharma will be interested. And guess what, sometimes it does fail despite expectations, you just don't see it broadcasted. So don't come to me here saying this is not science. In fact, according to your logic, does that mean that if a pharma is helping me fund my multi million study that will greatly help humankind, it is *gasp* FAKE???? Come on!!!!

 

[Kriss E]

A quick Google search reveals that the typical salary of a holistic nutritionist is ~$55,000/year.

It's hardly investment banking.

DGS's point is also irrelevant, as lots of people make tons of money from fraudulent work. The correlation between annual salary and value of labour is an imperfect one.

At the other end, I don't expect @Mrb1p to end up rich. He might, but in general the restaurant industry is an example of market failure.

DGS is just posturing up like a teenager would. He's lacking creativity and imagination. Pretty sure even his GF would be embarrassed by his lame response.

 

[DAChampion]

LMAO. Seriously man.

You think agencies or industry give fundings out of thin air? That I walk to them and say, hey I'm going to do this, give me money, pretty please... so when I say expect results, it is because before I contacted them I ran preliminary studies on a smaller sample size. Seriously, why do you think there are phase 1, phase 2 phase 3 etc?? Do you know the difference in costs between phase 1 and 2?? MILLIONS. You think someone would give that kind of money without having seen results of the preliminary phase?? Get real.

If I want to make a long term study on the benefits of vaccine, do I contact a dairy company or a pharma? Obviously, the pharma will be interested. And guess what, sometimes it does fail despite expectations, you just don't see it broadcasted. So don't come to me here saying this is not science. In fact, according to your logic, does that mean that if a pharma is helping me fund my multi million study that will greatly help humankind, it is *gasp* FAKE???? Come on!!!!

If you don't publish your null results, then you're not doing science.

By the way, I am submitting three different grant applications this week. I am writing about what I want to measure, how I plan on measuring it, and why it is important. I am not predicting what I expect the result to be.

 

[ECWHSWI]

it's quite hilarious to see genuises throw "you don't know science" at people who make a living in science...


maybe you don't have a nutritionnist wife and that's why your science is so poor.

 

[DAChampion]

Speaking of pseudoscience,

There was this health food shop near where I used to live. They did have some fun things there that are otherwise hard to find, such as acai berry packs, weird teas, and weird nuts and seeds. I liked being able to find those things.

But the guy working there could be annoying. I was shopping for nut milks at some point, and I noticed that most of them had the majority of their calories in added sugar. What's the point of adding sugar to soy milk or coconut milk? So I asked him about this issue. He then picks up a different brand, and says "try this, they use rice syrup instead, so it's healthier".

It's not.

I was reminded of that as I read this article critical of holistic nutrition:
I Used To Be a Holistic Nutritionist

The article is very critical. That said I understand why alternative medicine exists. A lot of people don't get answers from conventional medicine, they're desperate, and thus they're willing to experiment.

I was speaking to somebody the other day, who has had a continuous headache for twenty three years. If that was me, I'd plausibly be consulting with a lot of quacks. The desperation must be incredible, and that renders making tinctures of coconut oil, apple cider vinegar, Himalayan pink salt, manuka honey, and steel cut oats more understandable. Though this person is not doing that, I would understand them if they were.

And FWIW, I'm considering an elimination diet, which counts as alternative medicine, but it seems reasonable to me.