Guide to making claims based on research
Options
Replies
-
Lourdesong wrote: »I appreciate when people can back up their claims with citations or whatever, as in, I appreciate that they took the effort, but not as much as I appreciate someone explaining themselves and their pov in an easy-to-understand manner. Scientists on here who know how to talk to the general public are more useful to me than some socially inept poindexter who doesn't realize that knowing the intricacies and meeting the demands called for in his own profession isn't likewise at the top of everyone else's priority list in casual conversation and interaction.
Ivory tower rules belong in the ivory tower.
Expecting the general public ought to adjust their behavior to that called for in an academic setting, or otherwise, implicitly, to shut their trap, seems to me absurd and unfair.
Thank you. I agree. I am not an academic and I do not have time to source studies reputable or otherwise.0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
I don't. Most college instructors have only masters degrees.WalkingAlong wrote: »
I stopped reading there because I'm not claiming any thing at all about VLCDs except that 1200 isn't a VLCD. Do they say 1200 calories is dangerous for overweight adults? If so, I'll read them.WalkingAlong wrote: »
Are you saying you think 1200 is a dangerous VLCD and the way to lose is to 'eat more to weigh less'? And that links in my profile poked a hole in those beliefs, which makes you angry at me? You can see that no where in there does it say that anyone *has to* eat at any certain deficit or level, right? Just that if you choose to, the odds of hurting yourself are probably slim.WalkingAlong wrote: »I find it fascinating that the person that was refusing to post the studies to begin with is the one with a profile page completely dedicated to providing studies and links to 1200 calorie diets, VLCD and so on not being dangerous.
I put all that in my profile because I was so tired of you and others constantly posting that 1200 was always dangerous. And you know what? Since I put all that there and directed people to it in threads a few times, the 1200 b.s. has scaled way back.
I'm sorry you still see 1200 as "VLCD" though. It's really not. VLCD is generally considered 800 and lower. MFP itself recommends 1200 all day long. Kind of odd if it's VLCD, which they don't promote.
A couple years ago you could hardly read a thread without reading "you can't eat below your BMR!!" Enough of us bashed heads long enough that that myth finally slinked off into the shadows with the EM2WL crowd.
Now you've truly caught not only caught my attention but spurred me to action. I'm just a regular user of MFP and read a lot of the messages boards, where I stumbled upon both the "VLCD" and "EM2WL" arguments.
By the way, when I posted all that there, I repeatedly asked proponents for studies that said 1200 IS dangerous, so I could post them there, too. No one ever offered anything.
But this is getting way off topic.
I just tried searching in my university's database, I either don't know what search term to use or there just isn't muhc available in my school's database. I found one, which I cannot find an access link to unfortunately
NUTRITION NOTES. Source:
RN; Jan90, Vol. 53 Issue 1, p80-101, 1/3p
Abstract:
Presents updates on nutrition as of January 1990. Dangers of a hypo-allergenic diet in children; Risk faced by obese patients on a very low-calorie diet.
Otherwise, I can't find any articles that specifically talk about long-term adherence to VLCDs.
I believe you're right that there isn't much available in your university's database because there is overwhelming evidence that it's safe so studying it would be a waste of time and effort. They might refer to it as an LCD or as hypocaloric, though, if you want to keep looking.
..... Seriously, HOW do you have a doctorate? Researchers do not only study negative phenomena. They will even study plenty of things that appear to be common sense
I'm not going to argue this field with you, I'm sorry. Good luck in your classes and your quest for better cited forum posts.
And yet earlier you said you had a PhD.
Citation, please? I never said or implied that.
0 -
Sources, please.WalkingAlong wrote: »
I don't. Most college instructors have only masters degrees.WalkingAlong wrote: »
I stopped reading there because I'm not claiming any thing at all about VLCDs except that 1200 isn't a VLCD. Do they say 1200 calories is dangerous for overweight adults? If so, I'll read them.WalkingAlong wrote: »
Are you saying you think 1200 is a dangerous VLCD and the way to lose is to 'eat more to weigh less'? And that links in my profile poked a hole in those beliefs, which makes you angry at me? You can see that no where in there does it say that anyone *has to* eat at any certain deficit or level, right? Just that if you choose to, the odds of hurting yourself are probably slim.WalkingAlong wrote: »I find it fascinating that the person that was refusing to post the studies to begin with is the one with a profile page completely dedicated to providing studies and links to 1200 calorie diets, VLCD and so on not being dangerous.
I put all that in my profile because I was so tired of you and others constantly posting that 1200 was always dangerous. And you know what? Since I put all that there and directed people to it in threads a few times, the 1200 b.s. has scaled way back.
I'm sorry you still see 1200 as "VLCD" though. It's really not. VLCD is generally considered 800 and lower. MFP itself recommends 1200 all day long. Kind of odd if it's VLCD, which they don't promote.
A couple years ago you could hardly read a thread without reading "you can't eat below your BMR!!" Enough of us bashed heads long enough that that myth finally slinked off into the shadows with the EM2WL crowd.
Now you've truly caught not only caught my attention but spurred me to action. I'm just a regular user of MFP and read a lot of the messages boards, where I stumbled upon both the "VLCD" and "EM2WL" arguments.
By the way, when I posted all that there, I repeatedly asked proponents for studies that said 1200 IS dangerous, so I could post them there, too. No one ever offered anything.
But this is getting way off topic.
I just tried searching in my university's database, I either don't know what search term to use or there just isn't muhc available in my school's database. I found one, which I cannot find an access link to unfortunately
NUTRITION NOTES. Source:
RN; Jan90, Vol. 53 Issue 1, p80-101, 1/3p
Abstract:
Presents updates on nutrition as of January 1990. Dangers of a hypo-allergenic diet in children; Risk faced by obese patients on a very low-calorie diet.
Otherwise, I can't find any articles that specifically talk about long-term adherence to VLCDs.
I believe you're right that there isn't much available in your university's database because there is overwhelming evidence that it's safe so studying it would be a waste of time and effort. They might refer to it as an LCD or as hypocaloric, though, if you want to keep looking.
..... Seriously, HOW do you have a doctorate? Researchers do not only study negative phenomena. They will even study plenty of things that appear to be common sense
I'm not going to argue this field with you, I'm sorry. Good luck in your classes and your quest for better cited forum posts.
And yet earlier you said you had a PhD.
And in Canada, no, professors have PhDs.
0 -
Additionally i'll add that lecturer is a position, as in an adjunct, or a short term/contract position. Means they are not tenure track, and generally have fewer responsibilities in a department.
It does not denote a difference in educational degree, as in Master's vs. PhD.0 -
DeirdreWoodwardSanders wrote: »This whole Ph.D. question is a great example of the original problem -- research vs. experience.
I've been teaching without a Ph.D. at the university level for 20+ years. My close friends -- with and without Ph.D.s -- all teach at universities. My husband, a physics professor and chair of his department, needs to hire an instructor next year. He's accepting applications from Ph.D.s and from Master's degree applicants. The English Department has three openings for instructors -- they are accepting applications from Ph.D.s and Master's degrees. Dozens of my friends from grad school teach without their Ph.Ds. Ph.D. students are routinely granted teaching assistantships specifically to help them financially while they are completing their Ph.D., a process which might take as long as seven or eight years. The financial package is as common in Canada as it is in the United States.
In my experience, I'm totally right.
But in ana3067's experience, she's totally right.
At what point do we introduce a dozen research studies to prove one of us right?
My college advertised 93% PhDs.
In this case I think the best source of info is Ana. She believes all of her professors / instructors have PhDs. Based on information in this thread, it's possible that they do not.
Ana could do one of two things:
1) Confirm that she has explicitly been told the words, "all instructing personnel at this university have completed the requirements for a doctorate degree and have one", or
2) Ask a knowledgeable professor or Dean at her college if all the instructors are PhD holders.
I know I remember one of my Math Profs saying she hadn't completed her PhD yet but was thrilled to answer to "Doctor" since that's what all the students seemed to call the instructors
0 -
Level headed and unflappable. I've never seen anyone get jabbed with the MFP Mean Stick (aka MrM27) so many times and not lash back, ever, as far as I can tell. I wish I had the restraint.EatsNotTreats wrote: »
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
You are way too level headed for this forum.
I missed the baking soda thread, dangit.
-1 -
wow... people are bored with their lives...0
-
Subbed for MrM27's mean person thread.0
-
EatsNotTreats wrote: »Literature search ability, journal article appraisal ability, formal education in any scientific field...... A few of the things that have popped up for discussion on this thread.
A reminder that these things are NOT required to be an MFP member or to post a "claim" on MFP. Or any other open internet forum on this planet. At all.
A reminder that if you take exception to a "claim" (which is free speech), it is not the responsibility of the poster to do their research, and if that is indeed an expectation, it is a foolish one. It is the responsibility of the READER on this forum or on any other type of information medium to decide what is right for them and to corroborate the claim accordingly by doing their own research. Then that reader takes appropriate action (if any) with respect to how they want to apply any of this information towards their own lives.
This is of course obvious, but I did read a comment saying that the original post was intimidating. That is absurd. This is a forum, clearly open to all walks of life. Don't ever be intimidated.
Post what you want. When you want to. According to FORUM guidelines. No other.
Very good ideas.
To add to them then.
If the poster of the free speech has their claim denied and argued against, then they better not take exception that they are being disagreed with if they don't want to share why they believe that way.
If someone claims no one should eat after 5 pm in order to lose weight, and several folks jump on them informing all onlookers that no studies show that is true in general, then 2 things can happen.
The claimer can back down and rephrase that for them they didn't see weight loss until they stopped eating after 5 pm, and they recommend it, in which case all the others can present the studies that show it really doesn't matter strictly for weight loss.
Then all onlookers can decide for themselves if it might be a good idea to attempt based on personal observation, or a waste of their efforts being so restrictive based on studies.
Or the claimer can find the studies that show it is indeed better for weight loss and that's why they followed the advice.
Now onlookers can decide which side sounds better for the studies posted.
And it may end up in exactly the same spot for several onlookers, they'll either try it anyway, or they'll think it's too restrictive so why attempt if it appears no good studies shows it is useful.0 -
Oh, my gosh. It was hilarious. This woman was arguing with people over something (clean eating? low carb? I don't remember) and some things she said, I was like, "Hmmm" and other things I didn't agree with at all, but everyone was fighting with her and even though I didn't agree with everything she said, I thought she was doing her own thing and she even admitted that she might've been wrong and it was all fine. I was like, "Good for her, admitting she phrased it poorly" or whatever. I kind of thought she'd come around. I don't remember exactly.WalkingAlong wrote: »
Level headed and unflappable. I've never seen anyone get jabbed with the MFP Mean Stick (aka MrM27) so many times and not lash back, ever, as far as I can tell. I wish I had the restraint.EatsNotTreats wrote: »
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
You are way too level headed for this forum.
I missed the baking soda thread, dangit.
Then - pretty much out of nowhere! - she goes OFF on baking soda and how her family isn't eating it (with exclamation marks, I think) and how it's dangerous. I was like, "YES!!" thinking it was going to be fun reading her posts, lol. But then there was all the typical MFP stuff and less fun. People really should let those folks continue. I very much WANT to hear the logic behind that, lol. That's much more fun than arguing about links.
Thanks for saying nice things about me. You are too kind. I'm snarky on occasion, too. But thanks. 0 -
WalkingAlong wrote: »
Level headed and unflappable. I've never seen anyone get jabbed with the MFP Mean Stick (aka MrM27) so many times and not lash back, ever, as far as I can tell. I wish I had the restraint.EatsNotTreats wrote: »
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
You are way too level headed for this forum.
I missed the baking soda thread, dangit.
Then - pretty much out of nowhere! - she goes OFF on baking soda and how her family isn't eating it (with exclamation marks, I think) and how it's dangerous. I was like, "YES!!" thinking it was going to be fun reading her posts, lol. But then there was all the typical MFP stuff and less fun. People really should let those folks continue. I very much WANT to hear the logic behind that, lol. That's much more fun than arguing about links.
I don't recall it being out of nowhere. I recall that Sodium Bicarbonate was the scariest-sounding ingredient she found in KFC's chicken breading. I don't think she even knew it was Baking Soda and the whole business about her family avoiding it was probably BS and just her doubling down after being called out for being afraid of baking soda soly because it had a scary name and is used for cleaning and deodorizing. (I'll bet she has a box in her fridge, contaminating all her food right now)
0 -
Additionally i'll add that lecturer is a position, as in an adjunct, or a short term/contract position. Means they are not tenure track, and generally have fewer responsibilities in a department.
It does not denote a difference in educational degree, as in Master's vs. PhD.
It's a little different in Australia. We have 5 levels, Associate Lecturer, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Prof and Prof. All are tenured positions, although some ALs may be on contract initially. In my area (medical science), all 5 levels must have a PhD. I don't know of any Masters who teach, except as sessional staff in labs or tutorials.
I believe it's different in other disciplines though.
I'm still trying to get my head around the American system. I have a dream of doing a little stint in Hawaii (who doesn't?).
Anyway...off topic, sorry..
0 -
I remember the KFC thing, but she'd been arguing about that for quite a long time before the baking soda thing popped up.Lourdesong wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »
Level headed and unflappable. I've never seen anyone get jabbed with the MFP Mean Stick (aka MrM27) so many times and not lash back, ever, as far as I can tell. I wish I had the restraint.EatsNotTreats wrote: »
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
You are way too level headed for this forum.
I missed the baking soda thread, dangit.
Then - pretty much out of nowhere! - she goes OFF on baking soda and how her family isn't eating it (with exclamation marks, I think) and how it's dangerous. I was like, "YES!!" thinking it was going to be fun reading her posts, lol. But then there was all the typical MFP stuff and less fun. People really should let those folks continue. I very much WANT to hear the logic behind that, lol. That's much more fun than arguing about links.
I don't recall it being out of nowhere. I recall that Sodium Bicarbonate was the scariest-sounding ingredient she found in KFC's chicken breading. I don't think she even knew it was Baking Soda and the whole business about her family avoiding it was probably BS and just her doubling down after being called out for being afraid of baking soda soly because it had a scary name and is used for cleaning and deodorizing. (I'll bet she has a box in her fridge, contaminating all her food right now)
I wish I could remember what thread it was.
0 -
Lourdesong wrote: »WalkingAlong wrote: »
Level headed and unflappable. I've never seen anyone get jabbed with the MFP Mean Stick (aka MrM27) so many times and not lash back, ever, as far as I can tell. I wish I had the restraint.EatsNotTreats wrote: »
Maybe they shouldn't, but they will. It's going to happen. If you let that bother you, you will drive yourself bonkers.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »I totally agree, but some people may not understand how to read and interpret scientific studies, so it would be a real challenge for them. They may feel that they can't participate.
In that case they simply should not make any "research shows that" etc claims.
I enjoyed the post about baking soda being dangerous. Sadly, it devolved into "You're stupid and should prove it! / No I'm not! / Yes, you are! / Nuh-uh! / Yuh-huh!" and we all missed out on what could've been a very entertaining series of posts on the dangers of baking soda and, possibly, other baking products.
People are going to be wrong for the rest of your life. Might as well get used to it and not demand they submit research papers. At some point, you'll be wrong. Everyone is, sometimes. It's okay.
You are way too level headed for this forum.
I missed the baking soda thread, dangit.
Then - pretty much out of nowhere! - she goes OFF on baking soda and how her family isn't eating it (with exclamation marks, I think) and how it's dangerous. I was like, "YES!!" thinking it was going to be fun reading her posts, lol. But then there was all the typical MFP stuff and less fun. People really should let those folks continue. I very much WANT to hear the logic behind that, lol. That's much more fun than arguing about links.
I don't recall it being out of nowhere. I recall that Sodium Bicarbonate was the scariest-sounding ingredient she found in KFC's chicken breading. I don't think she even knew it was Baking Soda and the whole business about her family avoiding it was probably BS and just her doubling down after being called out for being afraid of baking soda soly because it had a scary name and is used for cleaning and deodorizing. (I'll bet she has a box in her fridge, contaminating all her food right now)
Yep, and I would rather people call complete twaddle like that out when seen rather than having other people read it and think it may be true. It may be amusing for some, but not for the people who read it, believe it, and act on it.
0 -
It was the "If eating trash makes us sick.." threadI remember the KFC thing, but she'd been arguing about that for quite a long time before the baking soda thing popped up.
I wish I could remember what thread it was.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10020547/if-eating-trash-makes-us-sick-why-do-we-keep-eating-it/p16
0 -
^^lol, just found it myself.
And I did not see her say she was wrong at all - she continued to keep arguing with terrible facts and basic inaccuracies.
Maybe I missed it though.
0 -
But I REALLY do wish that the studies would study non-obese individuals because retention of LBM in obese individuals eating very low calorie probably is not identical to those who are lean or simply at a healthy weight.
VLCDs are not recommended for healthy weight people, or even overweight - apart from some medical interventions like pre-operative applications.
They are however recommended for obese patients, which generally includes women of 200 lbs or more, and for defined duration like 8 - 12 weeks.
0 -
Ah, interesting.Charlottesometimes23 wrote: »Additionally i'll add that lecturer is a position, as in an adjunct, or a short term/contract position. Means they are not tenure track, and generally have fewer responsibilities in a department.
It does not denote a difference in educational degree, as in Master's vs. PhD.
It's a little different in Australia. We have 5 levels, Associate Lecturer, Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, Associate Prof and Prof. All are tenured positions, although some ALs may be on contract initially. In my area (medical science), all 5 levels must have a PhD. I don't know of any Masters who teach, except as sessional staff in labs or tutorials.
I believe it's different in other disciplines though.
I'm still trying to get my head around the American system. I have a dream of doing a little stint in Hawaii (who doesn't?).
Anyway...off topic, sorry..
In my wife's field which is Biology, I've only seen PhD holders in position of lecturer or higher. Other schools may be different of course, but generally from what I've seen, lecturer is an intinerant educator, moving from town to town to bring knowledge to the unenlightened, and packing up afterwards to move on into the sunset. I personally think it's a terrible misuse of quality educators, but I'm not involved in the business of education for revenue.
Once you're on the tenure track, you are an assistant professor, then associate, then full. somewhere down the line you can become an emeritus. Then there are the named professorships. I keep telling her, that if I ever get in the position that I can give her Uni a large donation, I'll do it with the requirement that she becomes a named professor, named after me since she refused to take on my name when we got married.
However, in the studio art area, I have several friends who are MFA holders who teach. I know several MBA holders who teach in the business school, etc.
As for Hawaii, I almost went to UoH@Manoa for a DBA, but determined that research was not as profitable as just an mba and a personalized set of morals. I'd go to Hawaii in a second though, although the stipend during the DBA program was $18k, I'm sure a lecturer position for an MBA holder would pay much better. That stipend though would have been horrid there in the land of $6 gallons of milk (when at the time the mainland was 50% cheaper.)
0 -
Lourdesong wrote: »
It was the "If eating trash makes us sick.." threadI remember the KFC thing, but she'd been arguing about that for quite a long time before the baking soda thing popped up.
I wish I could remember what thread it was.
http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10020547/if-eating-trash-makes-us-sick-why-do-we-keep-eating-it/p16
Yep! That's it! Page 16 has the baking soda post. I stopped reading shortly thereafter and missed the rest.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 938 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions