Science or news?
If you take the new report - on how red meat will kill you - to heart (lol!), you really need to read Dr Michael Eades's post over on his blog.
He debunks the study itself and offers up two different studies, that came out at the same time, that gave opposite results.
Just a teensy quote that says it all:
"The point of this post is that you shouldn’t get wound up about a study that gets reported throughout the media because there are more than likely other studies that are just as well done and just as important showing exactly the opposite findings that the press chooses to ignore. You’re not seeing the science as it is, you’re seeing the science as the press wants you to see it, which, typically, is the way that confirms the bias of members of the press."
(emphasis mine)
And if you're saying to yourself; "Oh, Blue, you're just farked off because it said something bad about meat!"; yes, I am, lol, but that's not it.
I am at heart a scientist and I just can't take seriously a study that gets a load of 50+ folks to record their diets (from memory) then carries on without noting what else the people are eating (most likely the crap Standard American Diet). There wasn't a control group, either. Heck, it doesn't even distinguish between whether the "red meat" is a fresh steak or a 1/4 lb of Spam. Was the "white meat" a chicken breast broiled skin-on or 4 slices of FrankenTurkey luncheon meat ("chopped and formed"!) loaded down with sugars and salt?
Not enough data = useless study. Sorry.
He debunks the study itself and offers up two different studies, that came out at the same time, that gave opposite results.
Just a teensy quote that says it all:
"The point of this post is that you shouldn’t get wound up about a study that gets reported throughout the media because there are more than likely other studies that are just as well done and just as important showing exactly the opposite findings that the press chooses to ignore. You’re not seeing the science as it is, you’re seeing the science as the press wants you to see it, which, typically, is the way that confirms the bias of members of the press."
(emphasis mine)
And if you're saying to yourself; "Oh, Blue, you're just farked off because it said something bad about meat!"; yes, I am, lol, but that's not it.
I am at heart a scientist and I just can't take seriously a study that gets a load of 50+ folks to record their diets (from memory) then carries on without noting what else the people are eating (most likely the crap Standard American Diet). There wasn't a control group, either. Heck, it doesn't even distinguish between whether the "red meat" is a fresh steak or a 1/4 lb of Spam. Was the "white meat" a chicken breast broiled skin-on or 4 slices of FrankenTurkey luncheon meat ("chopped and formed"!) loaded down with sugars and salt?
Not enough data = useless study. Sorry.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home