Peer reviewed studies are they the end all be all?

AnvilHead

crita50 wrote: »

Follow the money. The most important thing to note is who is paying for the study and what is their motivation for providing funding. What do they get out of it.

If you understood how studies are funded, you'd understand that who's funding it is nowhere near the most important thing to note.

mmapags

There is not clear answer or absolute truth to this stuff. In my mind, I have kind of a hierarchy of what I trust for valid information. From least trusted to most trusted:
Blogs
Anything with an obvious bias like a "keto" site or a "paleo" site as examples. There is little objective info and mostly just confirmation bias.
Article in fitness magazines or on sites like Livestrong or BodyBuilding.com
Youtube videos
Articles from WebMD or similar sites.
Heath Journal articles.
Studies
Peer Reviewed Studies
Scholarly Articles that review Peer Reviewed Studies
Meta Analyses of Peer Reviewed Studies

I think I got most right and in the right order. There are also people who's work and opinions I've some to trust. Brad Shoenfeld, Alan Aragon, Eric Helms and Lyle McDonald probably top my list. Over the years that I have been concerned with nutrition and fitness this group has proven to my satisfaction their intelligence, objectivity and desire to seek the truth in their work. This group, either individually, or often collectively, has reviewed and published on much of the relevant data that relates to diet and fitness.

Helms work on Protein Synthesis and Training Frequency is landmark IMHO. Aragon and Shoenfeld with their ongoing review of the Ketogenic Diet and Training effectiveness is just outstanding. McDonald is just a wealth of research based practical information.

In this world of data overload and lots of marketing woo, you have to develop your own instincts and vetting tools for sorting out the wheat from the chaf. It is not easy. But Peer Reviewed studies are at least a jumping off point to separate out the n=1 feels and the woo articles and blogs from the truth.

crackpotbaby

Many people have not been taught skills in critical analysis and are unable to identify what is quality data or how it can be interpreted or applied.

Some struggle to see the difference between an opinion and evidence.

Regardless of the source, for an individual without the ability to interpret and apply that data, all information is basically ... meh.

The quality of the research is critical but equally so is the analysis by the individual.

Critical thinking, ftw.

AnvilHead

smitra0

Peer review doesn't seem to work all that well in the field of nutrition:

http://www.onlinecjc.ca/article/S0828-282X(14)00237-2/abstract

https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/31/2/320/617698