News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Gonorrhea Is Becoming Untreatable, U.N. Health Officials ... by takeda on Wednesday August 31, 2016 @10:15AM (#12398435)
It's silly to refuse advice and to quote an article that doesn't deny that there could be an link, and it just say that there is no proof that definitively there is a link. It's extremely hard to do tests on humans whether something works on them or not, because scientists can't lock us in the cages to make sure we won't do anything else that will impact the results.

Right now the only way to find out is to try yourself, it is free after all, and you can't deny that in any case (whether it works for acne our not) reduction of sugar intake is good for your body.

Re:Gonorrhea Is Becoming Untreatable, U.N. Health Officials ... by vosper on Wednesday August 31, 2016 @11:12AM (#12398886)
You're really claiming it's silly to refuse advice from a random person on the Internet, in favour of waiting for studies and clinical data?
Re:Gonorrhea Is Becoming Untreatable, U.N. Health Officials ... by takeda on Wednesday August 31, 2016 @12:15PM (#12399381)
Yep, there's one thing to tell you to do something that could potentially be harmful, vs telling you to not doing something because it might be harmful to you.

It took 50 years before it we noticed that there might be a relation with smoking causing a lung cancer and 80 years (1980) before we were sure about it[1][2].

Acne though is far less serious issue, and not many people would be interested finding cause for it, especially since it would kill business for companies selling solutions that treat the symptoms (which do help, but you need to use them regularly)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tobacco#/media/File...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tobacco#Health_conc...

Re:Gonorrhea Is Becoming Untreatable, U.N. Health Officials ... by vosper on Wednesday August 31, 2016 @12:40PM (#12399601)
> "Yep, there's one thing to tell you to do something that could potentially be harmful, vs telling you to not doing something because it might be harmful to you.".

I don't think anyone was suggesting that it would be harmful to reduce sugar intake (although, I'm sure there may be cases where it is, or perhaps it's just easier said than done). I think it's more that there's apparently no proven link between sugar intake and acne and, given all the possible things that someone try in order do to reduce their acne, it might not make sense to choose one that has no evidence supporting it. Or at least, exhaust the other possibilities first.

Also, in the parent to my comment you say "scientists can't lock us in the cages to make sure we won't do anything else that will impact the results". But, they can, and do. It's called a controlled clinical trial. I've participated in one that went on for a week (was well paid for it) where we were kept in a room, fed a designed diet, and restricted in our activities. There were test subjects in the building who were in for much longer than my trial. So I don't think the idea that it's impossible to (dis)prove these things is accurate.