3 ms·
The thing to remember when you see a headline like this about an observational epidemiology study is that you're basically looking at educated superstition. Th
by frankus 14y ago
The thing to remember when you see a headline like this about an observational epidemiology study is that you're basically looking at educated superstition.
The authors can go to great lengths to remove all of the confounding factors they can possibly think of, but ultimately the best they can do is show a correlation. And almost every time a follow-up interventional study will fail to demonstrate a causal relationship.
(Full disclosure: I've been eating relatively low-carb for about 15 years and in the last two years reduced my intake even further. I'm currently by far the leanest I can remember being, despite being just a few pounds shy of the heaviest I've ever been).
- xiaoma 14y agoThere are limits to what you can do in terms of rigorous double blind nutritional studies on humans, unless you're a dictator or have free reign over a prison camp. That said I'll take their gigantic 25-year study designed by people whose life work is nutrition over your personal n=1 study. I might not take over my n=1 study if I did one, though. So, I definitely see where you're coming from.