2 ms·
> But medical research assumes that first hand experience can be deceiving, because of placebo effect. Well pointed out, it is. And for "general public" kind o
by esquire_900 7y ago
> But medical research assumes that first hand experience can be deceiving, because of placebo effect.
Well pointed out, it is. And for "general public" kind of advice, scientific processes absolutely help and are necessary to get to the right conclusions. The thing is, when someone else benefits from you eating sugar, journalistic pieces that put try to put people on the wrong foot (like these) will come out. Probably papers sponsored by sugar industry as well.
So why not go for your own experience? Like blunte mentions, many people experience the same kind of positive effects - isn't that science after all? And even if it's all just one big placebo and there ultimately is no negative effect of eating loads of sugar, whats the problem? People feel better :)
- Udik 7y ago> The thing is, when someone else benefits from you eating sugar, journalistic pieces that put try to put people on the wrong foot (like these) will come out. This is conspiratorial thinking. It's not healthy to shut off every opinion different from yours as an attempt to deception. > So why not go for your own experience? As I said, individual experiences are difficult to trust. Anyway, for what it's worth, I did cut drastically my sugar intake, for months. I found no benefits.