4 ms·

FYI, the paper says: > Rats of each group were supplemented with different beverages: (i) tap water, (ii) regular degassed CB (DgCB), (iii) regular CB (RCB) an

FYI, the paper says: > Rats of each group were supplemented with different beverages: (i) tap water, (ii) regular degassed CB (DgCB), (iii) regular CB (RCB) and (iv) diet CB (DCB) Where CB is carbonated beverages.

ohyes 9y ago
But there doesn't seem to be carbonated water? I think the assumption is that CB and Diet CB, would be something like coke or orange soda or whatever, and that degassed CB would be just coke that was left out so the bubbles dispersed. (Rather than 'soda water' as carbonated water might be called in some places). The obvious experiment would have been to test tap water vs. carbonated water, which makes one wonder if this study is yet another example of p-hacking. (We were testing this other theory and look at what happened in the dataset, let's make a paper on that!)
- mmastrac 9y ago
  I think they tested on humans separately, at least according to my understanding of the paper (linked elsewhere on ipfs in this thread). Screenshot (CW = carbonated water): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_-Rcr_UwAASYae.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_-Rcr_UwAASYae.jpg
cryptonector 9y ago
That doesn't answer the question though. It's a reasonable inference that "CB" here means "carbonated beverage", and it's reasonable to further infer that these are sweetened carbonated drinks (otherwise why include diet CB?). The paper is $35. In terms of advice to the public (which maybe it isn't!) it'd be nice if it unequivocally and explicitly covered carbonated water. I drink a lot of carbonated water. It's a recent habit. Thus I'm personally curious.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- hyperion2010 9y ago
  Reading over the methods the CB in this case is the 'regular' soda and is indeed sweetened. The main result for the rats is that the group given degassed CB gained less weight than the CB with CO2. There is another quote where they look at the reason for the weight gain and argue the following: "The cause of weight increase was probed. Rats, which were given access to RCB or DCB, significantly consumed more food daily, compared to rats which drank water or DgCB (Fig. 2A). This increased food consumption was due to a significant increase in ghrelin levels in the sera of rats on CBs (Fig. 2B). On the other hand, the levels of the satiety hormone, cholecystokinin (CCK), were assessed in these rats as well and the results showed no significant difference among different groups (data not shown)."
- cpncrunch 9y ago
  They tested carbonated water vs tap water for the human subjects, and Gherlin was about 0.32 for CW compared to 0.5 for tap water (fig 3 in the full paper). >The paper is $35 It's on sci hub.
  - 3131s 9y ago
    Why can I never actually get sci hub to work? I've even downloaded the data dumps but never figured out how to use their search. Is there a keyword search? All of my searches return "no articles found".
    - ce4 9y ago
      Searching by DOI will give you results. for this paper it is: 10.1016/j.orcp.2017.02.001

ohyes 9y ago

But there doesn't seem to be carbonated water? I think the assumption is that CB and Diet CB, would be something like coke or orange soda or whatever, and that degassed CB would be just coke that was left out so the bubbles dispersed. (Rather than 'soda water' as carbonated water might be called in some places). The obvious experiment would have been to test tap water vs. carbonated water, which makes one wonder if this study is yet another example of p-hacking. (We were testing this other theory and look at what happened in the dataset, let's make a paper on that!)

mmastrac 9y ago
I think they tested on humans separately, at least according to my understanding of the paper (linked elsewhere on ipfs in this thread). Screenshot (CW = carbonated water): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_-Rcr_UwAASYae.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_-Rcr_UwAASYae.jpg

cryptonector 9y ago

That doesn't answer the question though. It's a reasonable inference that "CB" here means "carbonated beverage", and it's reasonable to further infer that these are sweetened carbonated drinks (otherwise why include diet CB?). The paper is $35. In terms of advice to the public (which maybe it isn't!) it'd be nice if it unequivocally and explicitly covered carbonated water. I drink a lot of carbonated water. It's a recent habit. Thus I'm personally curious.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
hyperion2010 9y ago
Reading over the methods the CB in this case is the 'regular' soda and is indeed sweetened. The main result for the rats is that the group given degassed CB gained less weight than the CB with CO2. There is another quote where they look at the reason for the weight gain and argue the following: "The cause of weight increase was probed. Rats, which were given access to RCB or DCB, significantly consumed more food daily, compared to rats which drank water or DgCB (Fig. 2A). This increased food consumption was due to a significant increase in ghrelin levels in the sera of rats on CBs (Fig. 2B). On the other hand, the levels of the satiety hormone, cholecystokinin (CCK), were assessed in these rats as well and the results showed no significant difference among different groups (data not shown)."
cpncrunch 9y ago
They tested carbonated water vs tap water for the human subjects, and Gherlin was about 0.32 for CW compared to 0.5 for tap water (fig 3 in the full paper). >The paper is $35 It's on sci hub.
- 3131s 9y ago
  Why can I never actually get sci hub to work? I've even downloaded the data dumps but never figured out how to use their search. Is there a keyword search? All of my searches return "no articles found".
  - ce4 9y ago
    Searching by DOI will give you results. for this paper it is: 10.1016/j.orcp.2017.02.001