Guide to making claims based on experience

12346

Replies

  • Kalikel
    Kalikel Posts: 9,626 Member
    Liftng4Lis wrote: »
    glevinso wrote: »


    duty_calls.png

    TOO funny!
    Quoting to quote, lol. :)
  • ithrowconfetti
    ithrowconfetti Posts: 451 Member
    Azdak wrote: »
    Since everyone is here for advice and support on whatever their weight or body composition goals are, i feel it very important to know about actual real life instances and what may or may not have worked for people. If there was not a scientific study done on how you were successful, it's totally okay to provide an opinion of what works best for you. Ultimately what works for some people may or may not work for others, and if we all knew the secret none of us would be on this site. Continuing to provide personal and anecdotal evidence provides real life example and servesas a very positive motivator for many of us. And also because sometimes Lifes, not just Sciences. But always Maths! :)

    OP, I think the issue is that claims are valid, when backed by scientific studies, (which, on this site to be credible, usually involve human subjects). It's up to the reader to be discerning of what studies he/she choose to believe, take away from each study, and then determine how that can affect his/her lifestyle. Of course, opinions are welcome, but not every opinion can be made a valid claim for others to follow.
    Since everyone is here for advice and support on whatever their weight or body composition goals are, i feel it very important to know about actual real life instances and what may or may not have worked for people. If there was not a scientific study done on how you were successful, it's totally okay to provide an opinion of what works best for you. Ultimately what works for some people may or may not work for others, and if we all knew the secret none of us would be on this site. Continuing to provide personal and anecdotal evidence provides real life example and servesas a very positive motivator for many of us. And also because sometimes Lifes, not just Sciences. But always Maths! :)

    OP, I think the issue is that claims are valid, when backed by scientific studies, (which, on this site to be credible, usually involve human subjects). It's up to the reader to be discerning of what studies he/she choose to believe, take away from each study, and then determine how that can affect his/her lifestyle. Of course, opinions are welcome, but not every opinion can be made a valid claim for others to follow.

    Speak for yourself.
    The funniest thing is, when that thread started, i agreed...having recently acquired a graduate degree, i understand it is important to provide support. However when it changed into a "support your post with research, your opinion and advice is useless, we only care about what a scientific study said" i quickly changed sides.

    i've actually posted a few studies today when my thoughts were questioned (a nice term for the attitude of some on the forums). They can be useful. But so is what works for someone that has lost 100 lbs, as i place a lot more value on that opinion that a research paper, especially since much like statistics, you can find research supporting almost any claim.

    There is a fundamental flaw with that position, especially with weight loss. Anecdotes about short-term weight are extremely limited in usefulness. HCG "diets" are the classic example. Someone who follows an HCG protocol WILL lose weight initially--sometimes a substantial amount. Yet that weight loss is accompanied by a worsening of body composition and about a 95+% future failures rate. In that case, the "success" story and "real world" advice about something that "worked for them" would be misleading and potentially harmful. Someone with a cursory knowledge of research and academic nutritional fundamentals would know that from the start.

    The fact that any weight loss strategy has to have a minimum 1-2 year length of success before it is worth even acknowledging.

    Real-life experience should not be dismissed out of hand, but it needs to be remembered that anecdotal stories are the primary tools of the grifters and scam artists so prevalent in the fitness industry.

    ... I was speaking for myself. What made you think otherwise? This is why I personally prefer to get my information from objective well-substantiated studies, as opposed to subjective opinions, where things often get misconstrued.
  • Azdak
    Azdak Posts: 8,281 Member
    Azdak wrote: »
    Since everyone is here for advice and support on whatever their weight or body composition goals are, i feel it very important to know about actual real life instances and what may or may not have worked for people. If there was not a scientific study done on how you were successful, it's totally okay to provide an opinion of what works best for you. Ultimately what works for some people may or may not work for others, and if we all knew the secret none of us would be on this site. Continuing to provide personal and anecdotal evidence provides real life example and servesas a very positive motivator for many of us. And also because sometimes Lifes, not just Sciences. But always Maths! :)

    OP, I think the issue is that claims are valid, when backed by scientific studies, (which, on this site to be credible, usually involve human subjects). It's up to the reader to be discerning of what studies he/she choose to believe, take away from each study, and then determine how that can affect his/her lifestyle. Of course, opinions are welcome, but not every opinion can be made a valid claim for others to follow.
    Since everyone is here for advice and support on whatever their weight or body composition goals are, i feel it very important to know about actual real life instances and what may or may not have worked for people. If there was not a scientific study done on how you were successful, it's totally okay to provide an opinion of what works best for you. Ultimately what works for some people may or may not work for others, and if we all knew the secret none of us would be on this site. Continuing to provide personal and anecdotal evidence provides real life example and servesas a very positive motivator for many of us. And also because sometimes Lifes, not just Sciences. But always Maths! :)

    OP, I think the issue is that claims are valid, when backed by scientific studies, (which, on this site to be credible, usually involve human subjects). It's up to the reader to be discerning of what studies he/she choose to believe, take away from each study, and then determine how that can affect his/her lifestyle. Of course, opinions are welcome, but not every opinion can be made a valid claim for others to follow.

    Speak for yourself.
    The funniest thing is, when that thread started, i agreed...having recently acquired a graduate degree, i understand it is important to provide support. However when it changed into a "support your post with research, your opinion and advice is useless, we only care about what a scientific study said" i quickly changed sides.

    i've actually posted a few studies today when my thoughts were questioned (a nice term for the attitude of some on the forums). They can be useful. But so is what works for someone that has lost 100 lbs, as i place a lot more value on that opinion that a research paper, especially since much like statistics, you can find research supporting almost any claim.

    There is a fundamental flaw with that position, especially with weight loss. Anecdotes about short-term weight are extremely limited in usefulness. HCG "diets" are the classic example. Someone who follows an HCG protocol WILL lose weight initially--sometimes a substantial amount. Yet that weight loss is accompanied by a worsening of body composition and about a 95+% future failures rate. In that case, the "success" story and "real world" advice about something that "worked for them" would be misleading and potentially harmful. Someone with a cursory knowledge of research and academic nutritional fundamentals would know that from the start.

    The fact that any weight loss strategy has to have a minimum 1-2 year length of success before it is worth even acknowledging.

    Real-life experience should not be dismissed out of hand, but it needs to be remembered that anecdotal stories are the primary tools of the grifters and scam artists so prevalent in the fitness industry.

    ... I was speaking for myself. What made you think otherwise? This is why I personally prefer to get my information from objective well-substantiated studies, as opposed to subjective opinions, where things often get misconstrued.

    That part was actually meant to be a joke towards myself and then I decided to delete it altogether. I was doing all this in a crowded car and didn't realize I was still in the same reply box. By the time I saw it was too late to edit it out. Short answer: it was not intended towards anyone.
  • sjaplo
    sjaplo Posts: 974 Member
    RGv2 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    ana3067 wrote: »

    *Nisbett, R. E., & Masuda, T. (2003). Culture and point of view. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100, 11163-11175.
    2. *Masuda, T. & Nisbett, R. E. (2001). Attending holistically vs. analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 922-934.
    3. 2. *Chua, H. F., Boland, J. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Cultural Variation in eye-movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 12629-12633.
    *Masuda, T., Russell, M. J., Chen, Y. Y., Hioki, K., Caplan, J. B. (2014). N400 incongruity effect in an episodic memory task reveals different strategies for handling irrelevant contextual information for Japanese than European Canadians. Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 15-25.
    *Masuda, T., Wang, H., Ishii, K., & Ito, K. (2012). Do surrounding figures’ emotions affect the judgment of target figure’s emotion?: Comparing the patterns of eye-movement between European-Canadians, Asian-Canadians, Asian International Students, and Japanese. Frontier in Integrative Neuroscience, 6:72. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00072.
    *Imada, T., Carlson, S. M., & Itakura, S. (2013). East-West cultural differences in context-sensitivity are evident in early childhood. Developmental Science, 16, 198-208.

    (the papers btw are all pretty interesting, I have been reading them for my cultural psychology methods class)

    The gym is really pretty interesting, i've been lifting to benefit my fitness. And i've learned a lot more about diet, exercise, and a healthy lifestyle by DOING rather than reading about it. I feel the benefits of barbell lifting and arc training far outweigh the gains of page turning, especially for anything this site is concerned with.

    So you don't believe in researching to learn more about and develop your understanding.

    Doh'kay....sounds good.

    I never said that, i do plenty of research, and i even post study links. However a personal example is that i learned more about fasted cardio by doing it then by reading about how it would eat away at all my muscles for fuel, which it doesn't.

    LOL....can I see where you read that? That's the first I've heard that..........ever.

    Really? Quick search...

    http://www.mensfitness.com/training/build-muscle/should-you-do-cardio-empty-stomach

    http://www.jimstoppani.com/home/articles/fasted-cardio-in-the-morning?preview

    http://www.t-nation.com/training/fasted-cardio-eats-muscle

    I guess that's where our research differs. I don't dig through .com's and blogs...., or I take them with a huge grain of salt.

    All of my research shows that you need to seriously deplete your body of energy before it's going to turn to muscle for energy.

    Well i wouldn't call a google search and subsequent listing of a few top results from sites deemed somewhat reputable in the fitness community (t-nation, eh, dunno about that place lol) as digging. And for the MAJORITY of people on this site, that's EXACTLY what they do and that's the information they will see. Scholarly databases are not something i assume the general public goes to first for diet and fitness advice, but that's just my opinion.

    You're right. But that's why the general public gets so confused on how to lose weight. They believe everything they read without digging to find the credibility of that information. It's a weakness of modern society.

    Shame on us on trying to figure out what's actually backed by science and what's not.

    I beg to differ - nothing to do with modern society.

    We have found a witch, may we burn her?
    How do you know she is a witch?
    She looks like one!
    She turned me into a newt! I got better.
    She has got a wart!

    etc, etc, etc............

    I will say one thing. Because Humans period.

  • ThePhoenixIsRising
    ThePhoenixIsRising Posts: 781 Member
    Does she weigh the same as a duck?
  • sjaplo
    sjaplo Posts: 974 Member
    If she does....then .......she's made of wood?

    And therefore?
  • Wronkletoad
    Wronkletoad Posts: 368 Member
    SHE'S A WITCH!!!!!!!!
  • LONGTIME - I see you have two flags on your opening post - what the duce? you made an excellent point to me. Thank you.
  • dbmata wrote: »
    Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
    That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.

    This!
    Empathy, lol.

    What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?

    None of us are 8 years old.

    4512064099_57e2580ffe.jpg

    wow who is the guy in the purple
  • lorib642
    lorib642 Posts: 1,942 Member
    dbmata wrote: »
    Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
    That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.

    This!
    Empathy, lol.

    What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?

    None of us are 8 years old.

    What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)

    I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.
  • longtimeterp
    longtimeterp Posts: 623 Member
    LONGTIME - I see you have two flags on your opening post - what the duce? you made an excellent point to me. Thank you.

    And you got a flag for that...people use the flags unnecessarily and inappropriately now for sure.
  • longtimeterp
    longtimeterp Posts: 623 Member
    84123-Monty-Python-burn-the-witch-gi-EzMU.gif
  • Qskim
    Qskim Posts: 1,145 Member
    The science and conjecture behind the mechanics of weight is always fascinating to me, but the "whose study is bigger" pissing contests around here are the definition of tedious. Nine times out of ten that's just an instant scroll for me.

    The overwhelming majority of people still put great stock in anecdotal evidence. The theories behind how to lose a 100 pounds are awesome, but most people will naturally gravitate toward the person(s) who actually lost 100 lbs and want to hear how they did it.

    There's a place for both. But yes, on all sides, there are those of us who just love to debate and argue for the sake of.

    This thread is the left hook, the other thread is the right hook in the battle to solve obesity :)


  • Ang108
    Ang108 Posts: 1,712 Member
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    I think that science and anecdote can both have a place on these boards. The problem becomes when people confuse one for the other.

    yes, or use flawed personal experience as evidence…

    Like " i cut all sugar and lost weight; hence, sugar is bad for me and made me gain weight"…no, because you can eat sugar and lose weight …

    *shrugs*

    I have cut out all added sugar about 45 years ago, because I have childhood RA and eating too much sugar does not keep inflammation at bay. I have never said that sugar is bad and especially never have mentioned sugar in regard to weight loss, but still I get accused of saying it. I am also told to eat sugar " in moderation ", because not eating sugar is not sustainable for any one. I wonder when the time of sustainability starts ? After 60 years or 70 ? Is 45 years not enough to prove sustainability ?
    Also, it seems to me that those who demand scientific proof of certain statements often seem to be exempt themselves and feel they do not have to provide the same when they share their " truth ". .

  • dbmata
    dbmata Posts: 12,952 Member
    lorib642 wrote: »
    dbmata wrote: »
    Boy am I glad I never post links or claim I have all the answers. But, as someone who does read a lot of the forum posts, I can tell you this is the way it goes for me.... Person A posts a "truth". Person B doesn't agree and says so. Person A takes exception and posts a link purportedly backing their claim. At this point, I assume that any post/link person A has posted will back their claim, otherwise why post it. I've also taken note that others disagree. Now, person B, states why the link is junk, and makes their case, including 3 links of their own. I assume that each of these links will indeed back up what person B is saying. What I get from this whole scenario is that there are studies to say anything you want them to say, and if I'm interested in the truth, I need to research it myself. I would never assume that any link provided in a forum of this type is 100% accurate. I would not expect that there would be Doctors, Physical Therapists, Trainers, PhDs all here to offer me advice for free. I assumed at the beginning that all advice given was simply opinions. If something doesn't sound right, or I have questions, it's my responsibility to find out the answer. I don't think the people expecting citations give the rest of us enough credit for finding out things on our own. I also think that those people who might fall for the horrible gimmick are generally not the type who are going to read the research in the links provided.
    That said, I have no objection to people arguing against bad information and calling out the people providing it. Asking for links to back up the claims is a valid idea. I just don't think that expecting anyone who ever expresses an opinion as fact should be expected to provide this information in advance of being challenged. The forums have a way of policing themselves and the "Guidelines" just seemed too militant for an Internet forum that people use for support and ideas. We really aren't expecting perfection here. We're expecting advice and maybe some empathy from people who are going or have gone through the same things we are.

    This!
    Empathy, lol.

    What next, we gonna sit in a circle and sing songs?

    None of us are 8 years old.

    What is wrong with empathy, ( or kumbaya?)

    I am sure there are people who remember what it was like to deal with weight loss/diet issues that can at least relate to what a newer person is dealing with. I think I would expect it more in motivation/support, but it isn't a bad thing.

    Empathy is overrated, when reality and truth can be far more effective. *shrug*
  • dbmata
    dbmata Posts: 12,952 Member
    LONGTIME - I see you have two flags on your opening post - what the duce? you made an excellent point to me. Thank you.

    And you got a flag for that...people use the flags unnecessarily and inappropriately now for sure.

    You haven't noticed? Flags just mean:
    "I disagree with you, and I'm having a passive aggressive tantrum like a recalcitrant toddler!"
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,080 Member
    dbmata wrote: »
    My eyes glaze over when I get a scientific research link shoved at me.
    I'm much more interested in hearing from real life people with real life experiences :D

    it's attitudes like that that make parents not vaccinate their children and listen to Jenny McCarthy instead.

    but, but, thimerosal and mercury!

    Funny thing that Jenny McCarthy, she found it was hurting her brand, and she stepped away from the anti-vaxxing message.

    I can't say anything for the timing, but they also found that her child had a genetic disorder and that is wasn't vaccines. So maybe this had something to do with it as well.


  • fatcity66
    fatcity66 Posts: 1,556 Member
    RGv2 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    RGv2 wrote: »
    ana3067 wrote: »

    *Nisbett, R. E., & Masuda, T. (2003). Culture and point of view. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100, 11163-11175.
    2. *Masuda, T. & Nisbett, R. E. (2001). Attending holistically vs. analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 922-934.
    3. 2. *Chua, H. F., Boland, J. E., & Nisbett, R. E. (2005). Cultural Variation in eye-movements during scene perception. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102, 12629-12633.
    *Masuda, T., Russell, M. J., Chen, Y. Y., Hioki, K., Caplan, J. B. (2014). N400 incongruity effect in an episodic memory task reveals different strategies for handling irrelevant contextual information for Japanese than European Canadians. Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 15-25.
    *Masuda, T., Wang, H., Ishii, K., & Ito, K. (2012). Do surrounding figures’ emotions affect the judgment of target figure’s emotion?: Comparing the patterns of eye-movement between European-Canadians, Asian-Canadians, Asian International Students, and Japanese. Frontier in Integrative Neuroscience, 6:72. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00072.
    *Imada, T., Carlson, S. M., & Itakura, S. (2013). East-West cultural differences in context-sensitivity are evident in early childhood. Developmental Science, 16, 198-208.

    (the papers btw are all pretty interesting, I have been reading them for my cultural psychology methods class)

    The gym is really pretty interesting, i've been lifting to benefit my fitness. And i've learned a lot more about diet, exercise, and a healthy lifestyle by DOING rather than reading about it. I feel the benefits of barbell lifting and arc training far outweigh the gains of page turning, especially for anything this site is concerned with.

    So you don't believe in researching to learn more about and develop your understanding.

    Doh'kay....sounds good.

    I never said that, i do plenty of research, and i even post study links. However a personal example is that i learned more about fasted cardio by doing it then by reading about how it would eat away at all my muscles for fuel, which it doesn't.

    LOL....can I see where you read that? That's the first I've heard that..........ever.

    Really? Quick search...

    http://www.mensfitness.com/training/build-muscle/should-you-do-cardio-empty-stomach

    http://www.jimstoppani.com/home/articles/fasted-cardio-in-the-morning?preview

    http://www.t-nation.com/training/fasted-cardio-eats-muscle

    When I dig through .com's and blogs....,I take them with a huge grain of salt.

    All of my research shows that you need to seriously deplete your body of energy before it's going to turn to muscle for energy.

    I have an honest question. If this is true, why do we always lose muscle when we lose weight? I am genuinely more concerned about this, as I lose more weight, and I want to know how likely it is I will lose significant amounts of muscle if I don't lift "heavy" enough, and how much I will realistically lose? If I still have 70 lbs of ready fuel for my body in the form of fat, why would it turn to cannibalizing my muscle tissue? Especially if I eat enough protein?
  • WalkingAlong
    WalkingAlong Posts: 4,926 Member
    I don't think you will lose 'significant amounts of muscle' under those conditions. We always lose a mix of fat, lean mass and even fluid volume, given enough weight loss. I think the lean mass lost is usually the lean mass no longer needed in your lower body to move your now lighter frame around. Your body is re-proportioning itself for its new needs and size. I know some research shows the pendulum can swing too far in the wrong direction but I think for the most part the fear of LBM loss here is way overestimated.

    Do you know any 'biggest loser' types who lost their muscle but not their fat? What would be the evolutionary advantage of a body with pounds and pounds of stored energy in fat cells, and insufficient muscle to perform its daily needs?
  • dbmata
    dbmata Posts: 12,952 Member
    Dnarules wrote: »
    dbmata wrote: »
    My eyes glaze over when I get a scientific research link shoved at me.
    I'm much more interested in hearing from real life people with real life experiences :D

    it's attitudes like that that make parents not vaccinate their children and listen to Jenny McCarthy instead.

    but, but, thimerosal and mercury!

    Funny thing that Jenny McCarthy, she found it was hurting her brand, and she stepped away from the anti-vaxxing message.

    I can't say anything for the timing, but they also found that her child had a genetic disorder and that is wasn't vaccines. So maybe this had something to do with it as well.

    It was all marketing. She found her market value was reducing because she was being labeled as a wackadoo. Funny how not long from her reversal she joined the cast of a large tv show.

    She had to have known all along that her child's autism happened far before the child was vaccinated. There's kinda like... testing for it, and I believe that testing was available in 2005. However, there seems to be some questions about whether or not her child ACTUALLY had autism, or if it was more marketing. I'd lean towards the profit based motive, considering my experience in the entertainment industry.