Where is the science!

mcarter99

I pretty much agree with the OP. Especially about anecdotal evidence. But I also agree that science isn't definitive or all-knowing.

What bugs me is people don't seem to care much what the authorities say. Yes, the USDA is somewhat beholden to industry and that's probably why the new recommendations include a glass of milk. But there are other authorities and for the most part they all do say about the same thing- Eat less, move more.

But people get bombarded with a concept here to the point where they think it must be true. "All of these people here can EAT MORE and lose more! They're onto something the Mayo Clinic and USDA and WW and the whole medical industry missed! They all tell me eating below my BMR is dangerous which does sound reasonable yet my doctor tells me to eat 1200! My doctor must be wrong!" :sad:

Research shows that you can get a person to say a picture of a cat is a dog by surrounding them with people that say that cat is a dog.

Those are sesame seeds on the McDonalds bun. Poppy seeds are black and tiny.

myofibril

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/fundamental-principles-versus-minor-details.html

The end.

Good article and could be the end ...... if the article wasn't next to a big link saying 'Go to store'

How does one know if this is the definitive truth or yet another way in which the author is trying to make money - we don't

You're right. We don't. The only discipline where absolute proof is possible is mathematics. The rest is probabilities supported by research. Having say that if you are going to play the odds it is better to go with a safe bet generally.

You might find the following interesting if you are a seeker of the truth:

http://www.myosynthesis.com/two-minds-flame-war

ArroganceInStep

And I fear that my motivation for this thread is not for the greater good of mankind, but because I have reached the 99% mark and I'm just looking to tune the 1%

Ok, well in that case, all you can do is read what you can, try to form a reasonable hypothesis based on your interpretation of the information, and then try it and see.

The most elite folks when it comes to fitness didn't sit around waiting for the perfect study to come out that answered everything definitively, they went with the information that was available and acted on that assumption. If it didn't work they changed tactics; if it did work but not to the degree they expected they refined the program to better suit their needs.

Find a paradigm or philosophy that makes sense to you and that you think you could work with, and f***ing do it. That's really all there is to it.

Captain_Tightpants

The problem isn't the science, it's the distribution of misinformation - even at the level of medical professionals. Weight is such an emotionally loaded topic in our society that crap just gets spewed everywhere by everyone. The best you can do is find a source of information that you trust is relatively unbiased, capable of interpreting the studies accurately, and seems genuinely interested in getting to the core facts. For me, that person is Lyle McDonald (http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/)

iplayoutside19

.the reason people still debate these things is because they are prepared to believe anything without doing their own investigations.

Here are some links if anyone wants to start out

Meal Frequency
http://www.leangains.com/2011/04/critique-of-issn-position-stand-on-meal.html

God herein lies the problem!

i am NOT lazy and I am prepared to do the research! But how do we know what is true?

The first article that you link is a very interesting article about how one seemingly informed and reliable source (a nutritional consultant, magazine writer and personal trainer) is completely opposing another seemingly informed and reliable source (The International Society of Sports Nutrition) with regard to meal frequency!

You see my problem here!

Right, which is why with the exception of a few concepts mainly; You must expend more engery than you consume, everyone needs to learn by trial and error and figure out what works for them through experience. That's why I ignore most of the studies, tests, theories, fads, etc. Science likes to ignore one thing that seems pretty obvious to me, and that humans are emotional beings. Before I changed my lifestyle I KNEW that eating and living the way was, was not healthy. I even knew from classes I took in HS how to develop my own exercise program. It wasn't until I was emotionally mature enough to deal with the issue that I made any progress.

There's no "right way" to be active and healthy. What I do know, is that if a person emotionally buys into their weight loss & body transformation that they will find a way to reach their goals regardless what the experts say.

bcattoes

The definitive answer for everyone is "yes". Eating boosts metabolism so eating breakfast boosts your metabolism.

No YOUR definitive answer is yes
Somebody elses on here is No

I don't know, my wife doesn't know, half the people on MFP don't know

Thats my point. If breakfast DOES boost your metabolism, then it's a standard fact that virtually everyone agrees upon and there can no longer be any debate over it such as for example ... erm, obesity increases your chance of diabetes - truth is that it isn't a standard fact yet as there is still plenty of debate over it

You can 'debate' a fact all you want but it doesn't change the fact. It just makes the person debating against the fact wrong. Theories and hypothoses are debatable. Facts are facts.

But a fact isn't a fact because you said so. Tell me how you you perceive this to be a fact rather than a hypothesis?

Metabolism refers to all the physical and chemical processes in the body that convert or use energy. That includes digestion.

Here are couple of good articles on metabolism, if you are interested:

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/metabolism/WT00006/
http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/make-most-your-metabolism

bcattoes

There's no "right way" to be active and healthy. What I do know, is that if a person emotionally buys into their weight loss & body transformation that they will find a way to reach their goals regardless what the experts say.

Actually, any true "expert" will say this as well. The right plan for weight loss is the one you will stick with. Nutrition experts will also stress proper nutrition, but they will admit that losing weight by any means necessary will improve health, if even nutrition is poor.

Don't confuse scientific study results with expert advice. Expert advice will take into account science, but study results are confined to that study's parameters. Any study is only a piece of the puzzle and the results should rarely be used as advice.

Mindmovesbody

Sugar is sugar, tell me metabolically how sucrose in fruit is different from sucrose from a a sugar packet?

The benefits in eating fruit far outway any disadvantages of the sugar content - hence good for you. Nutritionally beneficial

There are no benefits to eating refined sugar so you get only disadvantages - hence bad for you. Empty calories

Its fructose that's in fruit not sucrose!! That's the difference! They are metabolised differently and surplus of each is stored and utilised differently! Sucrose (which breaks down to glucose) is stored as fat!! Fructose remains in the blood stream and is used by mitochondria to form energy!!

Thank you :flowerforyou: For the info and the sites mentioned above!

Hendrix7

.the reason people still debate these things is because they are prepared to believe anything without doing their own investigations.

Here are some links if anyone wants to start out

Meal Frequency
http://www.leangains.com/2011/04/critique-of-issn-position-stand-on-meal.html

God herein lies the problem!

i am NOT lazy and I am prepared to do the research! But how do we know what is true?

The first article that you link is a very interesting article about how one seemingly informed and reliable source (a nutritional consultant, magazine writer and personal trainer) is completely opposing another seemingly informed and reliable source (The International Society of Sports Nutrition) with regard to meal frequency!

You see my problem here!

But it gives all the possible tools to make your own decision. There is difference between believing in something based on the research you have conducted and believing something just because someone told you to.

If you are yearning for world in which everybody agrees with everybody else.....then you are in for a long wait. Educate yourself as much as possible...if other people don't want to do that, that's their problem.

Wonderob

. Educate yourself as much as possible...if other people don't want to do that, that's their problem.

But is it? Is the obesity epidemic the sole problem of each of the individuals or somewhat the collective problem of governments and society?

Let's take Maths as an example. If a country had a problem whereby all children were growing up ignorant of the basics of mathematics. Using your argument you could say educate yourself as much as possible, if people don't want to do that then that's their problem.

Or you could re-evaluate how and what a society is teaching and address it that way - why can't we do that for health too?

Wonderob

The problem isn't the science, it's the distribution of misinformation - even at the level of medical professionals. Weight is such an emotionally loaded topic in our society that crap just gets spewed everywhere by everyone. The best you can do is find a source of information that you trust is relatively unbiased, capable of interpreting the studies accurately, and seems genuinely interested in getting to the core facts. For me, that person is Lyle McDonald (http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/)

like this answer a lot, especially the phrase 'distribution of misinformation'
So true

Hendrix7

. Educate yourself as much as possible...if other people don't want to do that, that's their problem.

But is it? Is the obesity epidemic the sole problem of each of the individuals or somewhat the collective problem of governments and society?

Let's take Maths as an example. If a country had a problem whereby all children were growing up ignorant of the basics of mathematics. Using your argument you could say educate yourself as much as possible, if people don't want to do that then that's their problem.

Or you could re-evaluate how and what a society is teaching and address it that way - why can't we do that for health too?

Because maths is literal and not open to interpretation, 5+5 is 10. There can be no other opinion. Science is changing and adapting every year. Although I get what you are saying.

Wonderob

. Educate yourself as much as possible...if other people don't want to do that, that's their problem.

But is it? Is the obesity epidemic the sole problem of each of the individuals or somewhat the collective problem of governments and society?

Let's take Maths as an example. If a country had a problem whereby all children were growing up ignorant of the basics of mathematics. Using your argument you could say educate yourself as much as possible, if people don't want to do that then that's their problem.

Or you could re-evaluate how and what a society is teaching and address it that way - why can't we do that for health too?

Because maths is literal and not open to interpretation, 5+5 is 10. There can be no other opinion. Science is changing and adapting every year. Although I get what you are saying.

Ok I should have used teaching Science as an example

Dave198lbs

.

Bentley2718

(1) Our bodies are not "a science." We can use science as a way of learning about our bodies, but that is not the same thing.
(2) Science is not about identifying indisputable facts, science typically works by ruling out unlikely causes, not by identifying "truths."
(3) We don't actually know all that much about how our bodies really work, there is so much left to learn, that each new study typically raises as many questions as it answers.
(4) If you read the scientific literature, there are often conflicting findings. Why? See item 3.
(5) Much of what is reported about scientific research in the media is a poor representation of what was actually found. The amount of over-generalizing, etc. is truly painful.

While I appreciate your frustration, I think you're asking for a lot more from science than is reasonable at this point.

Silverkittycat

Firstly, everyone has an agenda, Scientists need to publish results to secure funding. Funding agencies need results to satisfy their backers. Secondly, no science is cut-and-dry. Especially sciences that involve human subjects. There are so many unknown variables, that it is often impossible to isolate single cause-and-effect relationships. All results are open to interpretation, and will be interpreted differently by different parties.

Exactly.

Giniac

I like the poppy seeds on the buns, they're worth the extra calories I think

CountryMom03

We need an indisputable list - not from Jenny Craig, not from Jillian Michaels, not from Shaun T, not from Tony Horton - they all have their own agenda!

who do think should provide you with this list? I really dont understand your point unless maybe you've had a few pints

It was a long post so I understand why you didn't read it all

"we need to be told these things once and for all by an impartial, unbiased organisation with the sole agenda of telling the facts!"

Governments, World Health Organisation, United Nations, Universities, National Health Service ....

"Governments, World Health Organisation, United Nations, Universities, National Health Service ...."...These organizations dont have your best at heart either unfortunately. They all have their big hand in the money of food corporations and it benefits them to not tell you the truth on things.

taunto

First thing first. I, as a soon to be Doctorate student, have given up reading studies and trusting these studies primarily because I know how easy it is to manipulate data, samples and statistics to your favor. What one research tells can and have been proved wrong 180 degrees by another research and both researches are done correctly and by proper standards. So anyone in here talking about "science", please, cut the crap. Most people who are in the field of science knows what goes behind the scenes.

Weight loss is simple, easy but yet its hard and sophisticated. In a way, living a healthy lifestyle is more art rather than science. An art to living healthy. Its simple because, well, eat right and exercise. How much simpler does it get? Its easy because we have all these variety of workouts, you can get everything imaginable to help you with living a healthy lifestyle.

But then its hard. The same lifestyle that gave you every tool needed to live a healthy lifestyle also gave you easy access to high calories. 1200+ calories salads. 2000 calories icecreams. We got these Baconaise which is mayonaise with bacon in it. We got the double down from KFC which is cheese and bacon within 2 deep friend chicken pieces used as bun. Its hard to eat right when every 2 inches there is something that is ridiculously high in calories and the servings sizes are crazy. So that is why weight-loss is sophisticated too since we have to plan and fend off these temptations.

So no mr. OP. I do not think we need government, or any other "authority" telling us what should be done. To lose weight, we should simply be living a healthier lifestyle and what is a healthy lifestyle? Well its the same thing that we as humans have been doing for centuries but only recently made a drastic change to. We used to walk everywhere. We used to eat good. We used to do hard days work. With our indoors jobs and cars and fast foods, we just have to plan a bit better to live healthier

mcarter99

First thing first. I, as a soon to be Doctorate student, have given up reading studies and trusting these studies primarily because I know how easy it is to manipulate data, samples and statistics to your favor. What one research tells can and have been proved wrong 180 degrees by another research and both researches are done correctly and by proper standards. So anyone in here talking about "science", please, cut the crap. Most people who are in the field of science knows what goes behind the scenes.

It's not easy to manipulate data in peer reviewed research. Science sometimes contradicts other science but it's not crap. It's the best thing we have. On the information quality pyramid, peer reviewed research is the pinnacle. Online forums are in the basement.

7Justice

Let's not kid ourselves. The United Nations? The World Health
Organization? They are the same so called experts that want to de-populate the world. No, we don't need "experts" to tell us that we should stop eating processed, genetically modified, anti-biotic/ hormone enhanced, high sugar, nutrient void frankenfoods and start eating REAL food that comes from the ground, plant life and non-diseased animal sources in the right portions. Do we?

What we need is to start thinking for ourselves the way we are supposed to. That way the "experts" can't fool us into drinking the next batch of spiked kool-aid meant to put us in coffins and fill their coffers with our hard earned dollars. :noway:

As Forrest Gump would say, "That's all I gotta say 'bout that."