6 ms·

Can someone in the know tell me whether this should be ignored like most nutritional research?

by scaredginger 4y ago

rscho 4y ago
Yes.
mrlinx 4y ago
Can you explain why, or link me to some reference?
- amanj41 4y ago
  AFAIK (not an expert) there are two common problems with nutritional research 1) Mechanistic data we don't fully understand the implications of. This basically means we observe mechanisms that we believe ought to have some effect on people, and yet when longitudinal studies are done to measure actual long term effects, they are not statistically significant 2) Confounding factors. In longitudinal studies, it can be very difficult to fully control for confounding factors, as diets are very complex. Take a hypothetical red meat study, where participants are simply instructed to eat "more red meat". Is a McDonalds burger different than a lean, grassfed steak? That's an easy one to control for, not the best example. But basically exemplifying how there can be a lot of variability within the intervention itself when it comes to nutrition
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
sph 4y ago
Yes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34015681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34015681
rat9988 4y ago
No. Unless conflict of interest,most nutritional research shouldn't be ignored. How you interpret academic research is up to you, and might be out of your league.
- buzzerbetrayed 4y ago
  Seems like GP is acknowledging that he’s out of his league, thus asking others to tell him if it’s worth while. And you’re responding by telling him he’s out of his league.
  - rat9988 4y ago
    I said that it shouldn't be ignored, but it is useless to him, as it's out of his league. What he probably wants is directives about what he should or should not eat. This is not the conclusion he can derive from a paper.
csours 4y ago
Link to actual study: https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nutrit/nuac086/6827512?login=false https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/advance-article/do... Some things I noticed: This is a meta-analysis, not a direct study by the authors. This is looking for an effect in other people's data. There are 18 studies with a total of 1105 individuals. This is very very low for a meta-analysis. They identified 81 studies that they 'wanted' to use, but they had to exclude all but 18. They have a nice chart: https://academic.oup.com/view-large/figure/381075699/nuac086f2.tif https://academic.oup.com/view-large/figure/381075699/nuac086... Look at the rightmost 2 columns. The only 'good' outcome with a large effect has low certainty. (Bottom Row, NAFLD) The only outcome with at least moderate effect and certainty has a bad outcome (Inflammation markers) In summary, the press release is truly garbage. The study is not bad, it shows the state of knowledge and research in this area, which shows that honey is food, not magic.
Buttons840 4y ago
It should not be ignored, but like almost all nutrition studies, it should only change our confidence in our beliefs a little: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ56uOkjccg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ56uOkjccg

Can someone in the know tell me whether this should be ignored like most nutritional research?

rscho 4y ago

Yes.

mrlinx 4y ago

Can you explain why, or link me to some reference?

amanj41 4y ago
AFAIK (not an expert) there are two common problems with nutritional research 1) Mechanistic data we don't fully understand the implications of. This basically means we observe mechanisms that we believe ought to have some effect on people, and yet when longitudinal studies are done to measure actual long term effects, they are not statistically significant 2) Confounding factors. In longitudinal studies, it can be very difficult to fully control for confounding factors, as diets are very complex. Take a hypothetical red meat study, where participants are simply instructed to eat "more red meat". Is a McDonalds burger different than a lean, grassfed steak? That's an easy one to control for, not the best example. But basically exemplifying how there can be a lot of variability within the intervention itself when it comes to nutrition
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

sph 4y ago

Yes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34015681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34015681

rat9988 4y ago

No. Unless conflict of interest,most nutritional research shouldn't be ignored. How you interpret academic research is up to you, and might be out of your league.

buzzerbetrayed 4y ago
Seems like GP is acknowledging that he’s out of his league, thus asking others to tell him if it’s worth while. And you’re responding by telling him he’s out of his league.
- rat9988 4y ago
  I said that it shouldn't be ignored, but it is useless to him, as it's out of his league. What he probably wants is directives about what he should or should not eat. This is not the conclusion he can derive from a paper.

csours 4y ago

Link to actual study: https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/advance-article/doi/10.1093/nutrit/nuac086/6827512?login=false https://academic.oup.com/nutritionreviews/advance-article/do... Some things I noticed: This is a meta-analysis, not a direct study by the authors. This is looking for an effect in other people's data. There are 18 studies with a total of 1105 individuals. This is very very low for a meta-analysis. They identified 81 studies that they 'wanted' to use, but they had to exclude all but 18. They have a nice chart: https://academic.oup.com/view-large/figure/381075699/nuac086f2.tif https://academic.oup.com/view-large/figure/381075699/nuac086... Look at the rightmost 2 columns. The only 'good' outcome with a large effect has low certainty. (Bottom Row, NAFLD) The only outcome with at least moderate effect and certainty has a bad outcome (Inflammation markers) In summary, the press release is truly garbage. The study is not bad, it shows the state of knowledge and research in this area, which shows that honey is food, not magic.

Buttons840 4y ago

It should not be ignored, but like almost all nutrition studies, it should only change our confidence in our beliefs a little: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ56uOkjccg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ56uOkjccg