5 ms·
It's ironic that now that a study comes out that supports your view, you accept it, but when the big studies said something opposite people were just "blindly t
by giarc 6y ago
It's ironic that now that a study comes out that supports your view, you accept it, but when the big studies said something opposite people were just "blindly trust the US public health authorities".
- undefined1 6y agothis is a meta-analysis, not a singular study.
- something98 6y agoI've got news for you. There never were any (well done) big studies that said the opposite. However, there were health authorities that repeated really bad "science" because it supported their preconceived notions.
- JPKab 6y agoYou are making assumptions that I wasn't skeptical of this study. I am. This study has pretty strong data behind it, and a much more rigorous methodology than studies which were literally foundational to Ansel Keys' lipid hypothesis that are borderline fraudulent in how the data was manipulated. The study which had the strongest impact on my opinions with dietary fat consumption was the longitudinal Framingham Heart Study. It's far, far more rigorous (and expensive) than virtually any of the studies being crapped out by the publish or perish grant-chasers. The absolute vitriol and emotional, irrational responses to the contradictions raised by Framingham really taught me lessons about the fashion-driven, corrupt nature of certain communities in academia.