Article: Vitamin Risk Overblown
12-05-2011 07:53 AM
Article: Vitamin Risk Overblown
12-05-2011 08:41 AM
And this was published in a well known journal? Sad. Good post, though, whoever posts ergo articles.
12-05-2011 10:53 AM
When this all came out before I was skeptical. I think they overlooked a potential correlation between exercise and diet; specifically, I think it's probably true that while a good number of people who take vitamins also exercise, I also think it's likely that a good number do not, simply because they feel that by taking vitamins they've "done their part". In any case, what they've done is *not* science. They've taken a set of data that was generated for a different study, and attempted to glean the information they want from it. The original study was intended to gather data about:"1) Determine if the distribution of body fat (waist/hip) predicts incidence of chronic diseases, with the primary endpoints being total mortality, and incident cancers of the breast, endometrium, and ovaries, and2) Determine to what degree diet and other lifestyle factors influence risk of chronic disease."So obviously the Iowa Women's Study was not designed to discern the effect of supplements on mortality. If the authors of the second "epidemiological" study want to learn about the effects of supplements on mortality then they would need to construct some tests designed to gather that data, then perform them. However, in today's world that's apparently too much work for a poor researcher, so we see these sorts of attempts at recycling data more and more often. I suppose it keeps the budget afloat, but it doesn't really contribute anything to the existing body of scientific knowledge.
12-05-2011 11:43 AM
Dr. Weil commented on this as well.
Supplements and Research - YouTube
12-05-2011 12:38 PM
Absolutely. It's really bad how so much research being discussed in public media has absolutely no scientific foundation. That is, it's not conducting according to the scientific method (hello? didn't we go to middle and high school, guys?). I mean how many independent variables do you have to have before you're rejected from publishing these days? Lol
Originally Posted by compudog
12-08-2011 08:31 PM
Unfortunately it is a requirement of researchers and academia to publish and get research grants. The best way to do that is raise an alarm and get attention. Alternately, a lot of 'research' is funded by legal groups with the intention of using such 'research' in legal cases. I left academia after being asked to alter study results (energy engineering) because: a) it wasn't what the grantor wanted in results; and, b) my conclusions were conclusions and not a lead to more grant money. I felt my credibility and reputation were more important. After that experience I refuse to believe research unless I can review the premises and be able to come to my own conclusions. Also, I am wary of studies that conclude with: "more research is required," or some variation.
Thank you for this article. It was excellent. Also, great link admin. thanks.
Similar Forum Threads
By yeahright in forum Supplements
Last Post: 12-26-2006, 04:27 PM