The humble egg is an example of what’s wrong with nutrition studies (2019)

Re:The humble egg is an example of what’s wrong with nutriti... by tus89 on Wednesday August 04, 2021 @04:36PM (#28065985)

Do researchers even get taught about the difference between correlation and causation? People who eat large numbers of eggs probably also eat large amounts of bacon (compared to others), and bacon as a highly cured meat with high levels of salt and other toxic compounds, could easily explain the results. And then there is this:

> But on the other hand, the study tracked participants’ health outcomes over periods ranging from 13 to more than 30 years, and participants were queried about their diet only once, at the beginning of the study.

Wow I don't know what to say.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The humble egg is an example of what’s wrong with nutriti... by ALittleLight on Wednesday August 04, 2021 @04:40PM (#28066026)

Yeah, I had a hard time believing that. Surely there's no way you could publish a paper purporting to be about health affects of what people ate if you only asked them once what they ate and used that to evaluate a multi-decade time frame. That hardly seems better than basing your findings on intuition.

[ Parent | on HN ]