3 ms·
A good example to use for how to read a paper. Make sure you get all the way to the end and see who sponsored the study, then re-read it in a new light. I was r
by cmpalmer52 3y ago
A good example to use for how to read a paper. Make sure you get all the way to the end and see who sponsored the study, then re-read it in a new light. I was reading through the find out what they were eating. Turns out, they were eating Prolon meal packs which you can buy yourself for $175, which gets you five white boxes of snacks. One for each day of your ersatz fast.
- echelon 3y agoI was going to say that the best way to read a paper is to jump from abstract to the conclusion to quickly get a lay of the land before reading the figures and the methods. But in this case you found a really sneaky deal breaker. > The FMD is a plant-based diet designed to attain fasting-like effects on the serum levels of IGF-1, IGFBP-1, glucose, and ketone bodies while providing both macro- and micronutrients to minimize the burden of fasting and adverse effects. Day 1 of the FMD supplies ~4600 kJ (11% protein, 46% fat, and 43% carbohydrate), whereas days 2 to 5 provide ~3000 kJ (9% protein, 44% fat, and 47% carbohydrate) per day. The FMD provided by L-Nutra to this study participants comprises proprietary formulations belonging to USC and L-Nutra (www.prolonfmd.com) of vegetable-based soups, energy bars, energy drinks, chip snacks, tea, and a supplement providing high levels of minerals, vitamins, and essential fatty acids34. All items to be consumed per day were individually boxed (Prolon) to allow the study participants to choose when to eat while avoiding accidentally consuming components of the following day. They bought a fucking Nature paper. Wild.
- heisenzombie 3y agoWell… Nature communications. But still.
- xk_id 3y agoPlease think before you judge. The company behind FMD has single handedly sponsored the largest body of empirical evidence in support of dietary interventions for ameliorating markers of ageing. They did so because they own the patent for their diet formulation. High quality human trials in this area wouldn’t have happened otherwise, because they are extremely expensive to run. We see this problem with other promising interventions that involve for example chemicals whose patent has expired: despite the imperative scientific need, nobody can afford to pay for the human trials. Besides, the characteristics of the diet formulation are known and can be easily reproduced at home. Overall, this company has made valuable contributions. In the last 50 years, the whole research industry has been forced by corporate-style management techniques, the financial environment and regulatory controls to become a servant to capitalism. So given the circumstances, this is the best possible outcome.
- riehwvfbk 3y agoAnd they would have published the results of these trials even if they didn't support the company's business model, I'm sure. And they certainly wouldn't cherry-pick results. In other words, this science is almost certainly bunk.
- gumby 3y agoNegative results very very rarely get published in academia either. They sure don't help you get tenure.
- bboygravity 3y agoI guess that makes OK that nature just MSM'ed itself (reference to mainstream media slowly dying as they're now doing anything for clicks and sponsors).