• Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The website is not a science blog, but just a dude interpreting a health paper.

    Maybe they’re right. Or not. I frequently find these people cherry pick whatever they want. Or worse, the paper is just a small sample and not yet ready for society… But news pounce on it because it’s “trendy”.

    But right now, this website doesn’t have a reputation that I trust, and put them in the same category as a health blogger who recommends shoving avocados in your butt to look more youthful.

    Edit: this was also posted on the “News” Lemmy instance group. I’m surprised they also identified the BS that I smelled when I read this. Come on Science… Do better.

  • Eldermantle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This finding reminds me of the studies that found people who drank a little alcohol lived longer than those who drank no alcohol. Further investigation finds that the no alcohol group included reformed alcoholics, who has already done enough damage to their systems to shorten their life expectancy, and this extra group was enough to skew the figures.

    So I think we need to ask: are there reasons to think taking <40% of calories as carbs is selecting for a group with shorter life expectancy? Maybe - anorexia would be one, although I’ve no idea of its prevalence among Japanese men.

    The paper makes no mention of considering this sort of thing. edit: correction because I can’t read the paper.

    • El Barto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Did you actually read the paper, or just its abstract?

      Edit: it’s a genuine question, folks. This is a science community.

      • Eldermantle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hmm… I thought I’d read the paper, but it turned out I got confused by an abstract with multiple sections. I thought it was very short. My mistake

        So I can’t say whether the authors addressed whether the low carbohydrate group was selecting for people already known to be at risk.

  • XeroxCool@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    This found opposing results between sexes with no mention of any additional lifestyle contributing factors.

    • El Barto@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      To complete the report: men who eat less carbs and fats temd to die sooner than the men who didn’t. And the opposite is for women: women tend to die sooner if they eat more carbs.

      • MrSnowy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        More proof that it’s OK to take that extra slice of bread at dinner, my dudes