Re:“We have no reason to believe 5G is safe”
by BostonFern on Monday October 21, 2019 @10:39AM
(#21312765)
In 2010, a meta-analysis seeking to reevaluate the scientific evidence behind the prevailing view that dietary saturated fats are tied to adverse effects on cardiovascular health was published.[1]
The study's conclusion, "a meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic [sic] studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD", unleashed a wave of news reports claiming dietary saturated fats were no longer considered harmful, further tilling the grounds for a movement urging the increase in consumption of saturated fats for added health benefits.
Again, I'm not a party to this particular debate on dietary saturated fats, but I am critical of the suggestion that a meta-analysis of an inconclusive body of studies will yield an actionable conclusion.
The study's conclusion, "a meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic [sic] studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD", unleashed a wave of news reports claiming dietary saturated fats were no longer considered harmful, further tilling the grounds for a movement urging the increase in consumption of saturated fats for added health benefits.
The 2010 meta-analysis has been criticized here: https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/91/3/497/4597072
Again, I'm not a party to this particular debate on dietary saturated fats, but I am critical of the suggestion that a meta-analysis of an inconclusive body of studies will yield an actionable conclusion.
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2824152/