4 ms·
to me that's encouraging. science has never been black and white. the mixed results can be a sign that we don't understand something properly. there's nuance a
by willsmith72 3y ago
to me that's encouraging. science has never been black and white.
the mixed results can be a sign that we don't understand something properly. there's nuance and depth adding noise to the results
it will only get better with more peer-reviewed studies and analysis
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoMixed results can also be evidence that everything is fraudulent and nobody is even pretending to try and replicate things. And as a layperson, even honest noise isn't useful.
- szundi 3y ago100 more years and we know more. Under we I mean someone else.
- wyager 3y agoThere's a difference between "not black and white" and "replication crisis". Nutrition studies suffer from a replication crisis.
- amanaplanacanal 3y agoQuite a bit of nutrition research is simply useless. They ask a bunch of people what they ate and then try to correlate that with health outcomes. You will never learn anything that way, though it might give you areas for further research. The next step up is a randomized controlled trial, but instead of choosing health outcomes they choose measurements of lab tests as their endpoints. Someone’s cholesterol went up or down by some small number. What did we learn? Nothing. Unfortunately good research is outrageously expensive, so it doesn’t get done.