News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Beekeepers halt honey awards over 'huge fraud' in global ... by carbocation on Saturday December 07, 2024 @07:08PM (#42353893)
An uncited statement in a review article!

If I'm rich in time and money enough to routinely take the time to wander down to my friendly beekeeper and buy their small-batch artisanal honey, for so many reasons I will live longer than someone who isn't.

Someone should randomize people to honey vs fake-honey-sugar-mix and settle the issue.

Re:Beekeepers halt honey awards over 'huge fraud' in global ... by nativeit on Saturday December 07, 2024 @07:48PM (#42354096)
You mean, something like this?

> Forty-eight articles published in 42 different journals were analyzed, with a total of 3655 subjects with 29.51 ± 21.51 years of age, of whom 1990 consumed or were treated with honey. Of the 3655 subjects, at least 1803 were women (two studies did not specify). The studies included different population groups (healthy subjects, overweight or obese subjects, diabetic subjects, subjects with cancer, children, etc.) and included more than 30 different types of honey. Although it is not a systematic review, the results of the PEDro scale regarding the quality of the articles were in the range of 6–10, with articles scoring 6 or higher being considered of good methodological quality.

Re:Beekeepers halt honey awards over 'huge fraud' in global ... by tucosan on Saturday December 07, 2024 @07:55PM (#42354131)
How do they know the study participants consumed honey and not corn syrup?
Re:Beekeepers halt honey awards over 'huge fraud' in global ... by rrr_oh_man on Saturday December 07, 2024 @09:43PM (#42354631)
How do they know 1803 study participants were women?
Re:Beekeepers halt honey awards over 'huge fraud' in global ... by carbocation on Sunday December 08, 2024 @01:30AM (#42355374)
There is no assertion that those individuals were randomized, simply "treated".