Pseudoscience and bad advice

In conclusion.... Research, find what works with you and GO FOR IT!



And don't be nasty to others who may have found another way that works for them Share don't scare!

I agree with ^^that^^, 110%.

Dr. Oz and Men's Health Magazine are excellent sources on diet info. So I don't agree that all magazines and TV info is bad. If you get your health advice from an infomercial, then YES - your point is well taken.

- Trusting national (non-commercial) health bodies and not-for-profit medical charities (and I do mean medical - no holistic or alternative medicine sources): NHS, British Heat Foundation, Cancer Research etc.
- Trusting health advice posted on reputable university websites or medical websites: Harvard Public Health, Columbia Medical school etc.
- Your doctor.

Sorry you can't trust national health bodies or medical websites or certainly your own doctor in a lot of cases. A lot of it is based on flawed scientific studies. A perfect example is dietary fat. The general consensus over the last 50 years was that too much dietary fat is bad. Too bad scientist Ancel Keys was wrong about dietary fat and cholesterol.

I don't know who you can trust honestly. You must use your intuition. You must cross-reference any advice you get with a number of different sources.

bumpity bump

You must cross-reference any advice you get with a number of different sources.

But if you had done that 10-15 years ago you would have STILL come to the conclusion that dietary fat was bad since that was the prevailing message of the day?

Science may not have the answers to every thing, scientists often dispute each others theories, and science has not always been right since the dawn of time; ideas are challenged and often crumble under scrutiny. But, at the centre of scientific study is the goal of finding the truth.

Intuition??!

I think it was Dara O'Briain who said:

"science *knows* it doesn't know everything, otherwise it would stop. . . . Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean that you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairy tale most appeals to you"

So how do you decide what to believe when faced with conflicting evidence?

You must cross-reference any advice you get with a number of different sources.

But if you had done that 10-15 years ago you would have STILL come to the conclusion that dietary fat was bad since that was the prevailing message of the day?

That would only be true if the sources you checked were the media. Most medical entities have been saying to replace saturated/trans fat with non-saturated fat for at least 30 years. There was a brief period back in the 70's where low fat was the fad, but further research quickly showed that the type of fat was the really important thing.

The only consensus is that trans fats are bad, not that saturated fats are.

These national publications are typically very far behind the science in their recommendations on many things.

These national publications are typically very far behind the science in their recommendations on many things.

Too often people who can't produce real results hide behind intellectualism or sacred dogma.

Just follow the MFP simple recommendations.
You don't need a science degree or a year to comb through every contradicting journal.
MFP makes it all real simple.
Eat healthy foods.
Create a 1 pound per week deficit.
Exercise

How hard is this?

You must cross-reference any advice you get with a number of different sources.

But if you had done that 10-15 years ago you would have STILL come to the conclusion that dietary fat was bad since that was the prevailing message of the day?

That would only be true if the sources you checked were the media. Most medical entities have been saying to replace saturated/trans fat with non-saturated fat for at least 30 years. There was a brief period back in the 70's where low fat was the fad, but further research quickly showed that the type of fat was the really important thing.

The only consensus is that trans fats are bad, not that saturated fats are.

I've never seen a medical organization recommend eating more saturated fats. There is very little (if any) nutrition subject that does not have conflicting study results. But I believe if you look to experts that study ALL the data, not select studies that make some point they'd like to sell, you'll get better advice.

Everyone's got to decide what to do for themselves, but this has worked for me. I come from a long history of diabetes, hypertension, heart and vascular disease on both sides of my family. I didn't want that for me or my children so I started reading up on nutrition when I had children (in my 20's). I read a lot of sources and I've followed the advice. I am 50 and disease free and on no medications. My now grown daughters eat the same way and have never had a weight problem and are also disease free. So I know this works for us.

I completely agree. A few things that need to go, that I've seen on here a lot (in my opinion):

*People insisting you have to stop eating after 7 (this is a suggestion to those that tend to overeat at night, but some, like myself, just aren't all that hungry earlier in the day and keep under my cal pretty well most days)
*The blood-type diet. This has no scientific proof whatsoever. It is ridiculous that anyone still suggests this.
*People insisting that you HAVE TO EAT BREAKFAST. Again, I am one that doesn't get hungry until later in the morning, so I have coffee when I get up, and eat an earlier lunch/brunch.
*People insisting on any sort of one-size-fits-all diet. We all have to figure out what works best for our taste, lifestyle, bodies, metabolism, etc..
*People insisting on any sort of one-size-fits-all exercise. Some may love the exciting cardio of a jillian michaels dvd, others may prefer the gentle movements of a yoga class. To each their own! :]

You must cross-reference any advice you get with a number of different sources.

But if you had done that 10-15 years ago you would have STILL come to the conclusion that dietary fat was bad since that was the prevailing message of the day?

That would only be true if the sources you checked were the media. Most medical entities have been saying to replace saturated/trans fat with non-saturated fat for at least 30 years. There was a brief period back in the 70's where low fat was the fad, but further research quickly showed that the type of fat was the really important thing.

The only consensus is that trans fats are bad, not that saturated fats are.

I've never seen a medical organization recommend eating more saturated fats. There is very little (if any) nutrition subject that does not have conflicting study results. But I believe if you look to experts that study ALL the data, not select studies that make some point they'd like to sell, you'll get better advice.

Everyone's got to decide what to do for themselves, but this has worked for me. I come from a long history of diabetes, hypertension, heart and vascular disease on both sides of my family. I didn't want that for me or my children so I started reading up on nutrition when I had children (in my 20's). I read a lot of sources and I've followed the advice. I am 50 and disease free and on no medications. My now grown daughters eat the same way and have never had a weight problem and are also disease free. So I know this works for us.

The medical organizations are just as blinded by bias as anybody else. And like someone else said, they are slow to adapt to new studies and findings, probably because they have the masses looking to them for advice, so they can't afford to make drastic changes in recommendations. The risk is too great.

What it comes down to is picking a side and if it appears to show positive results, stick to it. That's what I do. I don't do one thing, have great results, than be told by someone on a message board that its wrong (and cites research studies) and try their scientifically valid approach that doesn't work for me. Seems silly to me.

I agree. But I don't think being slow to adapt to new research is a bad thing. A study being more recent does not necessarily mean it's more valid. It should mean that it gets thrown into the pool of knowledge and evaluated along with all previous studies. Over time there may be enough evidence to change a recommendation, or to temper it, but not just for one conflicting result. This is why periodic meta-analyses of previous studies are helpful.

These national publications are typically very far behind the science in their recommendations on many things.

Too often people who can't produce real results hide behind intellectualism or sacred dogma.

Just follow the MFP simple recommendations.
You don't need a science degree or a year to comb through every contradicting journal.
MFP makes it all real simple.
Eat healthy foods.
Create a 1 pound per week deficit.
Exercise

How hard is this?

Yes. All the rest is just "fluff".

How many carbs, how much water, how often to eat, weigh before or after pooping, too much protein, not enough fat, exercise on empty stomach, cardio or no, lifting or no....seriously, just do the above. And be patient. It's not instant.

But one has to realize that even the common sense approach to weight loss advocated by MFP doesn't even work for everyone. Just look at a lot of the posts of frustration on how people are doing everything right and not losing weight. Or they have a hard time adhering to the plan. There is justification for looking outside of MFP and seeking advice that might be more scientifically grounded.

On the issue of trusting your GP, both times I visited my doc about losing weight, I walked out with a pharmaceutical prescription. When I asked to see a dietician or have some nursing input into a weightloss programme, I was told they wouldn't tell me anything I didn't already know. Well since I couldn't lose the weight clearly what I knew was wrong- they were pretty much admitting what they advise doesn't work!

In the end I pretty much ignored what the NHS says is a healthy diet, upped my fat intake, slashed the carbs, and it is working. So whether it's pills or nutritional pie-charts, I definitely do NOT trust NHS advice.

And you forgot one important item to look for.
People with results.
I judge the fruit a person produces before wasting time listening to his theories and philosophies.
If you can't make it work, I am not too much interested.

At the end of the day, results are all that matter.

I think I agree.
That person who's reached the same goals I have has valuable advice about their experipence. I'll listen to them for guidance, granted with a grain of salt because everyone's body is different and what works for them might not work for me. I look for achievers with my similiar body type, height and weight.

The fact that the lay person online HAS achieved the goal and gotten the results I'd like to replicate holds clout for me. More clout than a peer reviewed journal based on a study with specific parameters trying to prove a certain theory right or wrong. Aren't these carefully controlled experiments funded by corporations that want to sell their product? How many experiemnets are done with pure good-will with no other motive? Experiemtns have something to prove.

The person online sharing what they did to get their goals is much more applicable to my daily life than some experiement that claims the results of their study apply to the general public. The person online isn't trying to sell me something, they are saying what actually worked in real life, and perhaps it will work for me.

Just my take on it and the criteria I consider. I've had too many college classes poke holes in the credibility of experiments. In how data reported from controlled experiemnts is manipulated and twisted around to say what the people funding it want to hear. Not to say they are all bogus. But not all the people online are bogus either. I'll hazard a guess that lay people aren't the only ones on the internet giving their opinions. We're hob-nobbing with expert scientists too and what they have to say is relavent.

Well now. Pardon me. End rant.

The NHS is clueless on diet in my experience. My doctor even more so. I talk to him when I need something cut off or an injection, not for very much else. If I catch him in the gym one day bench-pressing, squatting and deadlifting like a baws, I will take his advice on that subject.