4 ms·

Too many confounding variables that can't be removed by a mathematical magic wand. What about obesity, what about body fat percentage? Yeah, fat men have lower

Too many confounding variables that can't be removed by a mathematical magic wand. What about obesity, what about body fat percentage? Yeah, fat men have lower testosterone levels. Yeah, non-smokers have lower testosterone levels. I drink a bunch of HFCS and sugar sweetened beverages. Don't feel like it affects my weightlifting, maybe teeth mostly.

jack9 5y ago
If you stick to fountain sodas, it won't wreck your teeth for decades. The acid in the can (and 2liters, small bottles, etc) is very hard on them.
- stryan 5y ago
  Is there a study about that? I'd love to see more info on difference in health effects between fountain soda vs bottled/canned.
  - Jiocus 5y ago
    I think this is a misconception. It's not about the fountain vs canned or bottle soda. Carbon dioxide lowers the pH of a drink to 4.5, which is acidic. The acid pH level erodes teeth and one shouldn't brush their teeth too soon after drinking soda because the enamel can be damaged. (Edit: acid on your teeth is always bad, brushing or not.) Getting a soft drink from a fountain often means getting a straw for your cup as well. Using a straw to drink does help somewhat to bypass the soda from making contact with the teeth in the first place. Use a straw, save a tooth.
    - phonypc 5y ago
      The pH of soft drinks is more typically in the range 2-4, due to the addition of various acids. And the negative effect of soft drinks on dental health is primarily from the action of acid-producing bacteria metabolizing sugar. Diet drinks aren't nearly as bad for your teeth, carbonated water barely has any effect.
      - Jiocus 5y ago
        You are right. Using a straw is helpful in all these cases.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - jack9 5y ago
      Canned soda ph2.5 and is a solution Fountain soda ph6.5 to ph8.5 and is a suspension The differences are stark.
CoastalCoder 5y ago
The study considered BMI.
- knuthsat 5y ago
  Impossible to regulate with a mathematical magic wand. Removing confounding variables works for physics, not really for anything else.
bena 5y ago
> Yeah, non-smokers have lower testosterone levels. Wait, is this true? Non-smokers have lower testosterone levels. That's weird.
Jtsummers 5y ago
From the article: > Other demographic and clinical variables examined as potential confounders included age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty/income ratio, BMI, serum cotinine, heavy drinker status, and physical activity MET score. BMI (weight/height2) was measured by trained technicians at the NHANES MEC physical examination [19]. Obesity was defined as a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 according to the World Health Organization criteria [20]. Heavy drinker status was defined as respondents who reported consuming alcoholic beverages ≥4 times/week in response to the question “In the past 12 months, how often did you drink any type of alcoholic beverage”? Physical activity was estimated by summing the time spent weekly engaged in activities as reported by participants, multiplied by the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) value for that activity, which yields a MET-h index. One MET is the energy expenditure of 1 kcal/kg body weight per hours [21]. MET-min/week ≥500 was considered physically active, and < 500 MET-min/week was considered non-active. I haven't finished reading it, but they do seem to have considered these other variables (body fat by using BMI as a proxy).
- knuthsat 5y ago
  I know that they are considering it but the variables are so noisy that the mathematics won't work. It never works when it comes to epidemiology. It works for physics.

jack9 5y ago

If you stick to fountain sodas, it won't wreck your teeth for decades. The acid in the can (and 2liters, small bottles, etc) is very hard on them.

stryan 5y ago
Is there a study about that? I'd love to see more info on difference in health effects between fountain soda vs bottled/canned.
- Jiocus 5y ago
  I think this is a misconception. It's not about the fountain vs canned or bottle soda. Carbon dioxide lowers the pH of a drink to 4.5, which is acidic. The acid pH level erodes teeth and one shouldn't brush their teeth too soon after drinking soda because the enamel can be damaged. (Edit: acid on your teeth is always bad, brushing or not.) Getting a soft drink from a fountain often means getting a straw for your cup as well. Using a straw to drink does help somewhat to bypass the soda from making contact with the teeth in the first place. Use a straw, save a tooth.
  - phonypc 5y ago
    The pH of soft drinks is more typically in the range 2-4, due to the addition of various acids. And the negative effect of soft drinks on dental health is primarily from the action of acid-producing bacteria metabolizing sugar. Diet drinks aren't nearly as bad for your teeth, carbonated water barely has any effect.
    - Jiocus 5y ago
      You are right. Using a straw is helpful in all these cases.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - jack9 5y ago
    Canned soda ph2.5 and is a solution Fountain soda ph6.5 to ph8.5 and is a suspension The differences are stark.

CoastalCoder 5y ago

The study considered BMI.

knuthsat 5y ago
Impossible to regulate with a mathematical magic wand. Removing confounding variables works for physics, not really for anything else.

bena 5y ago

> Yeah, non-smokers have lower testosterone levels. Wait, is this true? Non-smokers have lower testosterone levels. That's weird.

Jtsummers 5y ago

From the article: > Other demographic and clinical variables examined as potential confounders included age, sex, race/ethnicity, poverty/income ratio, BMI, serum cotinine, heavy drinker status, and physical activity MET score. BMI (weight/height2) was measured by trained technicians at the NHANES MEC physical examination [19]. Obesity was defined as a BMI ≥30 kg/m2 according to the World Health Organization criteria [20]. Heavy drinker status was defined as respondents who reported consuming alcoholic beverages ≥4 times/week in response to the question “In the past 12 months, how often did you drink any type of alcoholic beverage”? Physical activity was estimated by summing the time spent weekly engaged in activities as reported by participants, multiplied by the metabolic equivalent of task (MET) value for that activity, which yields a MET-h index. One MET is the energy expenditure of 1 kcal/kg body weight per hours [21]. MET-min/week ≥500 was considered physically active, and < 500 MET-min/week was considered non-active. I haven't finished reading it, but they do seem to have considered these other variables (body fat by using BMI as a proxy).

knuthsat 5y ago
I know that they are considering it but the variables are so noisy that the mathematics won't work. It never works when it comes to epidemiology. It works for physics.