4 ms·
"There's evidence that..." does not equal "To prevent Alzheimer's, do...." Science does not work that way. We start from a hypothesis ("Alzheimer's is a type
by pmiller2 6y ago
"There's evidence that..." does not equal "To prevent Alzheimer's, do...." Science does not work that way. We start from a hypothesis ("Alzheimer's is a type of metabolic dysfunction."), to test that hypothesis ("Intermittent fasting may delay or prevent the onset of Alzheimer's."), to finally saying "There's evidence that...." Eventually, once there's enough evidence, we can say with some certainty "To prevent Alzheimer's, do....", but we're not there yet.
- sillysaurusx 6y agoYes, and it's extremely unsettling that we have absolutely no idea what causes it or how to treat it. But jumping straight to "There is evidence in mice" with the implication of "try this yourself" is not justifiable.
- peatmoss 6y agoOn the other hand, even if it’s highly speculative, the cons for most people are “feeling hungry” and “a handful of other benefits that are supported by a growing body of evidence.” I’m all about rigorously testing the hypothesis over time, but the safety / risks of the intervention has been well studied for a very, very long time. “Might help and extremely unlikely to hurt” is not a bad basis on which to decide to take up IF.