Sweet N' Low Helps Us Gain Weight

Sweet N' Low Helps Us Gain Weight

Rat research seems to indicate that Sweet N' Low and other saccharine-type sweeteners may contribute to weight gain behavior:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health ... es.mxf.cnn

Also in the news: eat eggs to reduce cholesterol and drink alcohol for increased cardio health.

So, what have we learned...?

David Hammond wrote:Sweet N' Low Helps Us Gain Weight

Rat research seems to indicate that Sweet N' Low and other saccharine-type sweeteners may contribute to weight gain behavior:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health ... es.mxf.cnn

Also in the news: eat eggs to reduce cholesterol and drink alcohol for increased cardio health.

So, what have we learned...?

That Sleeper (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070707/) has all the nutrition guidance you'll ever need?

Last week, the NY Times reported that Metabolic Syndrome may be tied to the intake of diet soda:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/healt ... 5symp.html

David Hammond wrote:Sweet N' Low Helps Us Gain Weight

Rat research seems to indicate that Sweet N' Low and other saccharine-type sweeteners may contribute to weight gain behavior:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health ... es.mxf.cnn

Also in the news: eat eggs to reduce cholesterol and drink alcohol for increased cardio health.

So, what have we learned...?

scientists don't know shit

YourPalWill wrote:Last week, the NY Times reported that Metabolic Syndrome may be tied to the intake of diet soda:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/healt ... 5symp.html

IF the study is good, it demostrates correlation, NOT causality.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Ramon wrote:

David Hammond wrote:Sweet N' Low Helps Us Gain Weight

Rat research seems to indicate that Sweet N' Low and other saccharine-type sweeteners may contribute to weight gain behavior:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/health ... es.mxf.cnn

Also in the news: eat eggs to reduce cholesterol and drink alcohol for increased cardio health.

So, what have we learned...?

scientists don't know shit

More accurately, good research is very hard to do. Just like most cooks are not very good, most researchers aren't either. The result is that there's a lot of bad science and bad research out there.

The stuff that gets reported and grabs the headlines is not necessarily the high quality stuff. Science reporters - even at the best papers - are not actually very knowledgeable about the topics they cover and they can't always tell the good stuff from the bad stuff. They can't always tell the reader what the strengths and weaknesses of a study are. So, readers are left with a lot of tantalizing stories, but the conclusions of many aren't likely to hold up.

Last week, the NY Times reported that Metabolic Syndrome may be tied to the intake of diet soda:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/healt ... 5symp.html

I stopped drinking my daily 20 ounce Diet Pepsi after reading this and switched to Twining's Earl Grey Tea. (Yes, I look very dainty padding around the office in the mid-afternoon. No wonder friends used to call me Niles.) I've lost five pounds in the last week--and eaten four frosted cookies a day from Pasticceria Natalina, two ginger cookies from Fox & Obel since Sunday, two bowls of Jay's potato chips last night at 10 pm, some chocolate with Marcona almonds that my girlfriend gave me last night, and three crappy frosted Valentine's day cookies someone brought into the office this morning. If I can sin that much and still come out ahead, I'll take the correlation.

As noted above, most of the work that passes for science (I'd say 'science' except that over-quote-marking has come into question recently on LTH)on this sort of topic, is, at best, bad science. The finest critique ever done remains Feinstein's, which I quote:

Science, Vol 242, Issue 4883, 1257-1263
Copyright © 1988 by American Association for the Advancement of Science

ARTICLES
Scientific standards in epidemiologic studies of the menace of daily life
AR Feinstein
Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510.

Many substances used in daily life, such as coffee, alcohol, and pharmaceutical treatment for hypertension, have been accused of "menace" in causing cancer or other major diseases. Although some of the accusations have subsequently been refuted or withdrawn, they have usually been based on statistical associations in epidemiologic studies that could not be done with the customary experimental methods of science. With these epidemiologic methods, however, the fundamental scientific standards used to specify hypotheses and groups, get high-quality data, analyze attributable actions, and avoid detection bias may also be omitted. Despite peer-review approval, the current methods need substantial improvement to produce trustworthy scientific evidence.

Geo