Separating Fact From Fiction
SaltNBurnBoys
Posts: 170 Member
One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
0
Replies
-
Good question! I'm curious about that too0
-
That is the nature of studies and scientific research.
If you are looking for solid advice about nutrition and training I recommend joining this group...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/groups/home/10118-eat-train-progress
And checking out this page for a start...
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/833026-important-posts-to-read
and here are some sites...
www.alanaragon.com
www.weightology.net
www.bodyrecomposition.com
www.body-improvements.com
Hope that helps.
ETA: Just so you know this is a new account for me but I have lost over 50 lbs since joining MFP originally and am now currently bulking...so I have had some experience with the links I provided you with.0 -
For me I simply ask where is the independent 3rd party clinical research studies published in peer reviewed journals on the product as a whole.0
-
One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
Honestly? I don't. I listen to my body and pay attention to what gives me results. The rest is really just noise. Every body is different - in different environments, stress levels, medical issues, access to food, etc. I just try to eat good food and stay active.0 -
Sometimes it's not an issue of Fact vs Fiction or Truth vs Fantasy. Sometimes it is, but when you actually get down to the research, it's all kind of bound by certain constraints. We can have discussions about how those constraints do or do not make the results useful in different situations (e.g. the "real world")
A lot of the arguments happen because of poor analysis of data...in that each side thinks the other is doing a poor job of analyzing.0 -
The short answer is that not all science is created equal, nor is it reported equally.
The helpful answer is to look for programs that are peer-reviewed and backed by reputable organizations.
For example:
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/obesity/e_txtbk/index.htm
http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/hbp/dash/how_make_dash.html
But ultimately TheVirgoddess is right. What works for you is what works for you. What makes you feel best on a consistent basis, and helps you reach your goals in a way that doesn't make your doctor do the worried frown thing.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
In. To see where this goes.0
-
One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
Honestly? I don't. I listen to my body and pay attention to what gives me results. The rest is really just noise. Every body is different - in different environments, stress levels, medical issues, access to food, etc. I just try to eat good food and stay active.
This is right. All of these studies are used and based on the people in these studies it will go either way. But also, most of these studies are funded by companies that want them to produce a certain result so that people will buy into it and support the company funding because they'll sell products or whatever supporting the results of the study. But anyways, what you really should do is listen to what people have to say about any advice you ask for, and then experiment with it yourself and see what works best for you and your body. Everyone is different and won't get the same results from the same programs and diets and so on. Only you know how your body handles things, so treat it how it wants to be treated and you'll have more success than any study will show.0 -
I work for a science lab, so I am always researching scientific articles for my boss. His standards are that they must come from a peer-reviewed source, always cite sources, and list more than 3 reputable sources and/or authors (such as universities or other science labs).
When I research health and nutrition topics for myself, I apply the same criteria.0 -
So if that's your approach then why even bother with the forums? If we all just spread noise then then same can be said about what you say, no?One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
Honestly? I don't. I listen to my body and pay attention to what gives me results. The rest is really just noise. Every body is different - in different environments, stress levels, medical issues, access to food, etc. I just try to eat good food and stay active.
When most of us listened to our bodies we got fat, no?
Disregarding solid information that is out there is a good way to limit what you can learn.
I took the OP to mean things like "sugar is terrible, stop eating it now" vs "weight loss is all about calories in vs calories out".
Everyone has a different idea about what healthy is. Examples include studies done on caffeine, sugar, carbs, etc. I don't pay attention to those, sorry. I know what happens to ME when I have too much sugar, or carbs or whatever. I can feel it. That's what I meant when I said "listen to my body".
I thought it was pretty accepted that watch what you eat + staying active = weight loss (in most cases). So I didn't think the OP was talking about that. If I misunderstood, my apologies.
And the reason i come to this forum is support and friendship.
I really wish people would ask for clarification instead up jumping down my throat.0 -
But anyways, what you really should do is listen to what people have to say about any advice you ask for, and then experiment with it yourself and see what works best for you and your body.
This is really the most helpful thing I've seen. Because "don't listen to the articles, just do what works" doesn't really help if you don't know where to even start looking for what works.
That being said, thanks everyone for your answers.
Edited because apparently the HTML codes I know don't work on this site.0 -
And I didn't mean "noise" in a bad way - it's just not something *I* choose not to focus on, so it's noise to ME.0
-
One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
This is why it is incredibly important that such information be shared and discussed. Many people on MFP feel attacked when something they believe to be true is called out and they are asked to provide scientific evidence of such. That is not necessarily the case. Being critical is necessary to wade through the misinformation and find shreds of truth that we can piece together.
And those "scientific" posts are even more important so that the studies themselves can be analyzed by the membership and inconsistencies with the methodology or conclusions be pointed out, rendering it an invalid source.0 -
I work for a science lab, so I am always researching scientific articles for my boss. His standards are that they must come from a peer-reviewed source, always cite sources, and list more than 3 reputable sources and/or authors (such as universities or other science labs).
When I research health and nutrition topics for myself, I apply the same criteria.
While I don't work in a science lab, I have become an expert in my field and I still use that criteria from other experts in my field. So why would I do anything different when it comes to health and nutrition, where I'm not an expert.0 -
This is why it is incredibly important that such information be shared and discussed. Many people on MFP feel attacked when something they believe to be true is called out and they are asked to provide scientific evidence of such. That is not necessarily the case. Being critical is necessary to wade through the misinformation and find shreds of truth that we can piece together.
And those "scientific" posts are even more important so that the studies themselves can be analyzed by the membership and inconsistencies with the methodology or conclusions be pointed out, rendering it an invalid source.
+10 -
So if that's your approach then why even bother with the forums? If we all just spread noise then then same can be said about what you say, no?One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
Honestly? I don't. I listen to my body and pay attention to what gives me results. The rest is really just noise. Every body is different - in different environments, stress levels, medical issues, access to food, etc. I just try to eat good food and stay active.
When most of us listened to our bodies we got fat, no?
Disregarding solid information that is out there is a good way to limit what you can learn.
People get fat by ignoring their bodies...0 -
I don't necessarily have a problem with the stance of "I'll listen to my body and to what works for me instead of looking to research to find answers."
IF
We understand that some people are bad at it. If they only relied on their own perceptions of themselves, their bodies, or an inaccurate understanding of nutrition, they would hurt themselves...and possibly influence other people to do the same, depending on what's being advocated. Of course, all of that is subject for debate, as it should be.
And maybe you happen to be the kind of person who is healthy, happy, satisfied, and successful without looking at specific research, and you're just coming here for support. It might be a good idea to understand that there's a significant percent of this forum population who views the legitimate discussion of the research as being vitally supportive. Whether or not you do is kind of irrelevant; just don't engage.0 -
One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
This is why it is incredibly important that such information be shared and discussed. Many people on MFP feel attacked when something they believe to be true is called out and they are asked to provide scientific evidence of such. That is not necessarily the case. Being critical is necessary to wade through the misinformation and find shreds of truth that we can piece together.
And those "scientific" posts are even more important so that the studies themselves can be analyzed by the membership and inconsistencies with the methodology or conclusions be pointed out, rendering it an invalid source.
I agree with this...
Often times when people claim something their "evidence" is a blog or an article...
Until I see a peer reviewed study (esp from here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov or other reputable sites) I will read it but most commonly will discount it.
As well there are often times if it is an article to support a study I look at the poster of the article. After a year here I have learned who knows what they are talking about based on results, advice given and the impact it has on the receiver of the advice to know who knows what they are talking about.
I also know that on this site there are quite a few people who have more letters behind their names then my name has letters...they don't flaunt it, brag about it or typically don't even bring it up...(if they do it's to discount some moron who brought up all their degrees to discount studies etc *wont mention names of those who did that :laugh: ) and I remember them...and will typically give them more credance than others who have yet to prove themselves here...(not saying those with degrees don't have to prove themselves they do...)0 -
So if that's your approach then why even bother with the forums? If we all just spread noise then then same can be said about what you say, no?One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
Honestly? I don't. I listen to my body and pay attention to what gives me results. The rest is really just noise. Every body is different - in different environments, stress levels, medical issues, access to food, etc. I just try to eat good food and stay active.
When most of us listened to our bodies we got fat, no?
Disregarding solid information that is out there is a good way to limit what you can learn.
People get fat by ignoring their bodies...
Sweetie, no we dont. Your body wants to store energy. Listen to it and you will get fat.0 -
That is the nature of studies and scientific research.
i agree with that. sometimes there is out right false information being handed out.
As with many aspects of science, including as it applies to exercise and nutrition, there is not definetive agreed upon answer for every (or even most) questions.
Its up to the 'consumers' of the information to weight the merrits of both sides of the argument by doing thier own research.
in the end, the best test is to apply something in your own life (if safe and not extream) and honestly evaluate the outcomes.0 -
One thing I've noticed in my few months here is that for every post that seems to be scientific and well-founded information, there's another equally scientific and well-founded post that says exactly the opposite.
How do you guys determine which one is true? Are there certain sites you trust and others you avoid?
I look at who is saying it and how it's being phrased.
1. A website where someone trying to sell me something (pill, their book) or having an obvious agenda (all artificial things are BAD, natural is GOOD) is going to just be ignored. If their language choices are obviously inflammatory, biased (calling things sludge for example), or scare-mongering good-bye.
2. If I see obvious errors in their scientific thinking, good-bye. (It's only one atom away from cyanide!!!)
2. An article on a website where the author has NO science background and doesn't link to the original research or provide direct quotes of the original research is going to be ignored. Even with a science background, the author should be clear if this is a field where he/she has expertise or is completely unrelated. (For example a dentist writing about climate change would be kinda silly.)
3. An article with a sensationalist click bait headline is going to be already in the hole and need to dig itself out (because I realize that authors are not responsible for their headlines, but there is a good chance the author is also #2).
4. An article/paper where the original research is linked, what is confirmed, what is correlated, and what is suspected/promising is clearly delineated and not confused will have my attention.
A well written article about a study will tell you who paid for the research, where it was performed, who was/were the head researcher(s), the sample size, the control methods used, what they were attempting to find/confirm, and the outcomes. It will not say "researchers in Germany PROVE chocolate cake cures cancer". What it will say is "Dr. Heidi and Dr. Gretel headed up a team at the University of Doofenschmirtz to research the outcome of daily ingestion of at least 150 mg of dark chocolate baked goods in the diet. 250 male and female cancer patients with either breast, prostate, or skin cancer in Stage I or Stage II were divided into 3 groups, one group given a daily dark chocolate muffin, one group given nothing, and one given a daily dark brown muffin containing no actual chocolate. All three groups continued to receive normal treatment for their cancers. The doctors performing the monthly health checks were not told the group assignment of any patient and the patients were warned against revealing it. At the end of 6 months, the chocolate muffin group had a 10% higher remission rate and the non-chocolate muffin had a 5% higher one. The study was financed in part by the Gingerbread House Witches Council "
Since a great deal more information was provided a thinking reader will start coming up with questions and see the limitations of the research. For example, in this study, no one was CURED of cancer or PREVENTED from having cancer because of the chocolate, they were receive normal treatment in addition to the chocolate. The non-chocolate group also had a higher remission rate, so could the daily treat just make patients feel better and therefore respond better? Does it need to be in a baked good? Does the patient need to know they are receiving it to work? Does it have to be dark chocolate and in certain concentration and dose? Does the potential for other problems (weight gain for one) outweigh the benefit?
I'd still want to see a link to the study or see an official third party review of the study because it could still be manipulated for the benefit of the Gingerbread People. If they originally started with 500 patients and 250 were dropped from the study because they didn't continue to meet certain parameters (for example suddenly having diabetes, too high a BMI, or dropping dead) we would want to know that!0 -
I do my own research from multiple sources and draw my own conclusions. a lot of people on here make statements and post information about a topic like its fact when its really just an opinion or misinformation from a website thats not credible, same people that probably like/share posts on facebook because it says to.0
-
This is really the most helpful thing I've seen. Because "don't listen to the articles, just do what works" doesn't really help if you don't know where to even start looking for what works.
That being said, thanks everyone for your answers.
I'm sorry that I misunderstood your question and that my answer wasn't helpful.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I work for a science lab, so I am always researching scientific articles for my boss. His standards are that they must come from a peer-reviewed source, always cite sources, and list more than 3 reputable sources and/or authors (such as universities or other science labs).
When I research health and nutrition topics for myself, I apply the same criteria.
+10 -
Sweetie, no we dont. Your body wants to store energy. Listen to it and you will get fat.
Okay, but I didn't say "eat whatever your body tells you".
Here's an example of what I mean:
I hadn't had anything packed full of sugar in over a month. At my daughters birthday party, I had a small piece of cake. That cake made me feel incredibly gross - sluggish, lethargic, etc. This even went on into the next day. That tells me a rush of sugar like that is not good for *me*. I'm certain lots and lots of people on here can happily have a piece of cake and not feel like I did.
That's literally all I meant, because like I've previously stated, I misunderstood the OP.0 -
researching for yourself (using google scholar or another website that gives actual published studies, not articles), and checking sources of others info0
-
I tend to discount anything that speaks in terms of absolutes (i.e., you MUST eat this, NEVER eat that, cut out ALL of this, etc.). When I see those kinds of words, I start wondering about the author's agenda or what product they're selling. Reputable scientific studies don't tend to report their findings that way, unless it's something like "NEVER eat drain cleaner" or "you MUST keep intaking oxygen."0
-
One thing I learned in my statistical research class, if it was the ONLY thing I learned in it, is that you can make data support whatever your philosophy is. It is hard to decipher the good stuff from the crap.
There are some things that work for some people but not for others. How you determine whether or not it'll work for you is up to whether or not you're willing to try it out, and whether or not you think you'll survive the "trial period."
I try to pay more attention to my dieticians since the advice they've given me so far has worked. If/when it stops working I'll move on to another source(s).
I try to generally take other information with a grain of salt, and will ask either the dietician or doctors their thoughts. For example, there are lots of people doing cleanses lately. Not a fan of those. I figure if they were that great to begin with, my dieticians and bariatric doctors would be raving about them, and ya know what? They really aren't. They're not even mentioning them. When I asked them (dietician/doctor) about the cleanses, they asked why I'd want to do something like that, that they saw no value in doing it.
I'm all for bariatric surgery. Some people have just too hard of a time either saying no to stuff they shouldn't eat or limiting their portions (and some people have hormone imbalances or insulin resistance and/or other issues that exacerbate that - so it's not ENTIRELY their fault) - so bariatric surgery is a great tool that can help people. I'm still considering it if I hit a brick wall from somewhere very hot that I can't get past. For the time being, I'm on the "go with what's working...what I'm doing's working...so why change it." Further, if I get surgery, then I'm GOING to have to change my eating habits. SO why not go ahead and change my eating habits anyway. If I can't get it done, I can still do the surgery.
Anyway - I think I've hit a rabbit trail! LOL
It's all about figuring out what works for you, and in a way that you can live with those changes or fit them into your lifestyle.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions