"Children's breakfast cereals loaded with sugar, study finds - http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/childrens-breakfast-cereals-loaded-with-sugar-review-finds/story-fni0fiyv-1227332304276"....
As a recent cultural heroine once said, "Does the word DUH mean anything to you?"
Here is yet one more reason why non-clinical research scientists don't really contribute much to the world's accumulation of knowledge. Their entitled decision of what constitutes "data" short-circuits information which is actually useful to actual human beings. (<-redundancy intentional)
The "paleo" community is inclined to be influenced by what time-honored cultural wisdom has gleaned through the centuries. What our ancestors have observed and treasured from time immemorial is respected by individuals who have become disillusioned by the hubris-inspired "scientific" reasoners like Ancel Keys. Cherry-picking "serious researchers" find ideas they like, which agree with their personal paradigms, and consider themselves misunderstood but vindicated geniuses, as a result of finding (sometimes pathetic) studies which theoretically confirm their personal biases.
"The plural of anecdote is not DATA," says one of these sky-pilots (recently on twitter, NOT addressing ME who challenged him ... but obliquely).
Sorry, asshole -- yes it is.
The accumulated wisdom of millennia is EXACTLY THIS: the observation of n-1 experiences of thousands of individuals. THIS is cultural wisdom. THIS is the collective experience of mankind.
That which our foremothers decided was important to hand down to posterity is exactly what is reflected by the common-sensical observations of intelligent individuals. Is the "study" quoted above really better evidence than the multitudinous n=1 observations of our ancestors? "Study finds cereal full of sugar" ... what shit-for-brains "moran" didn't know this already?
Or is such a "study" just academic BULLSHIT dressed up in the robes of scholastic graduates, putting on the semblance of respectability where it isn't actually earned?
All I know is I can't wait for science to get caught up to what I've already discovered about my own n=1 to feel better. Thank GOD I can think for myself. ;)
ReplyDeleteScience (tm) as a whole will NEVER catch up to the scientISTS on the front line who are unafraid to challenge the status quo. :-( Science (tm) is a monolith, unable to be budged until someone takes a chisel (or dynamite) to it. Science (tm) is a Stalin, more interested in getting its own way and holding on to power, than it is in working for the well-being of its dependents.
DeleteYes, being able to think and act for ourselves is a blessing ... despite the attempts of ALL those monoliths to "protect us from ourselves" and placebos and frauds ... for our own good, of course.
It is often forgotten that most studies about life-style choices have serious flows and fit mostly for generating hypothesis, not for finding a proof of a theory. Our N=1 gives us answers for our personal situation.
ReplyDeletePetro (may he live long and prosper!) opened my eyes to how DUPLICITOUS study-publishers can be, too.... It isn't just a situation where trials done with a handful of healthy, young, white-collar-class males is extrapolated to the entire population -- it's often feeding CIAB to mice and calling it an Atkins diet, or actually seeing the one reaction in the study and then claiming the complete OPPOSITE to be true, in the abstract.
DeleteA well-thought-out N=1 is the ONLY health-truth i can whole-heartedly believe in anymore, and it's really easy to overlook confounding variables.
Also it is difficult to isolate one parameter when a life-style choice is investigated, so the declarations like "Researchers from Western University in Canada examined over 1,200 men and women to come to the conclusion that regularly eating egg yolks was two-thirds as bad as smoking when it comes to carotid plaque in the arteries, a known risk factor for stroke and heart attack." are even less reliable as any random guess and suitable mostly for attraction attention of readers.
DeleteThe point of the Paleo diet is, and I feel some people forget this, to not only diet, but to eat delicious foods at the same time. Paleo is the only diet I've come across that cuts out food groups, yet still focusses on everyone's need to eat great food.
ReplyDeleteI'm a real foodie, and would not survive on any other diet, but Paleo has been very good for me. I've written about a couple of my favourite cookbooks here: http://cookbook-reviews.net/review-the-paleo-grubs-book/
Right, it's about life-enhancement! It's hard to feel good about our lives if we don't feel good within our bodies. A lot of conditions can affect that, which is why we don't JUST watch our diets, but our sleep and our movement and ... much more! :-)
DeleteI also appreciate how LC food tastes, but I have noticed that my interest to food and eating diminished. I still can generate endless recipes and actually don't need a cookbook at all, but now I could even feel lazy to cook - which never happened before. I guess my food obsession turned into being a relaxed foodie. It happened very gradually. I have been LCarbing since November 2007.
DeleteIt IS so interesting that what we customarily eat impacts our tastes and appetites so much! Brain and body chemistry as well as nutrient status completely dictate what we WANT to eat -- then "experts" tell us it's "emotional eating"....
DeleteI noticed some time ago that very often (not always) adult females fit into two categories - thinner ones who like to clean, plump ones who are more interested in cooking or at least in a shopping for food. In the light of my own experience now I realize that their biology may determine such division. The ability not to experience a maddening hunger is definitely not a gift from a nature like artistic inclinations, but a symptom of certain type of metabolism. The people who can easily skip meals or pass on any food at sharing table with others are not possessors of iron will, they are not really hungry.
DeleteSometimes I miss how great food used to taste, but I prefer to be in a good control.
what a great observation! it never occurred to me, but that sounds very plausible. "cleaners" have so much extra energy they want to move around, and "cookers" are focused on the product of their energy ... or so i'd intuit. ;-)
DeleteGoing back to " Study finds cereal full of sugar " !
ReplyDeleteI couldn't help notice the recent TV and magazine adverts for these breakfast cereals is the buzz word nutrition !!?? I can just hear so many shoppers out there saying 'but it says nutrition on the box so it must be good" Oh Dear - just give me a humble egg please.
All the best Jan
oh, at least TWO eggs! :-) plus bacon or ham....
DeleteThis reminds me of the study that came out a few weeks ago announcing that eating yogurt produced no health benefits. Really? Pudding with a little bacteria doesn't do you any good?
ReplyDeleteNO KIDDING! ...but these are STUDIES -- this is true DATA ... leading to Evidence Based Medicine!
DeleteAs a charming filmmaker put it, "OOOH, what a lie!" :-D