I received this in an email today:
“...Here’s what to avoid: The study, which was published Monday by scientists at the University of Exeter and presented at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference 2019 in Los Angeles, looked at four main signs of a healthy versus unhealthy lifestyle. Those who were more likely to develop dementia reported eating an unhealthier (do we know this, or is it speculation by the researchers?) diet higher in fat and sugar and salt, did not engage in regular physical activity, smoked cigarettes and consumed alcohol.
A 2017 study found a fifth item worth avoiding: Artificial sweeteners. “Drinking at least one artificially sweetened beverage daily was associated with almost three times the risk of developing stroke or dementia compared to those who drank artificially sweetened beverages less than once a week,” according to the study, published in the American Heart Association journal “Stroke.”
I've learned a bit about the scientific method over the past 10 years or so. Using some of that knowledge, allow me to critique the above paragraphs.
Let's look at this line:
"Those who were more likely to develop dementia reported eating an unhealthier diet higher in fat and sugar and salt, did not engage in regular physical activity, smoked cigarettes and consumed alcohol."
Note the "more likely to develop dementia," well, did they develop it or not? And what is the meaning of "more likely?" The general population develops at 1.0% and the studied group at 1.003%? We don't know. Maybe they know, but it's not clear in this paragraph above.
Now, quiz, did the study actually measure the fat, sugar, salt in the diets? Nope, self reported per the paragraph. Do you think all the subjects (and how many were there?) accurately remembered what they ate and how much and when? Remember these are dementia patients, so maybe memory might be an issue?
Even if all of this is true, we still have a problem of cause and effect. Suppose that certain people who will develop dementia like to eat fat, salt, sugar, smoke and not exercise more than the general population? Maybe they are just different people? Basically this "good" study might be a starting point, but it is nowhere close to being evidence of anything.
In the next paragraph we have a report by another study that associates artificial sweeteners with a three times greater risk of all sorts of bad things. Interestingly the first study cited didn't mention sweeteners! Yipes! And the second study didn't mention all the dietary things that the first study did. Were they looked for? Hard to tell. We don't know what either study didn't find associations for. But since both studies were looking at diet, so we might suspect that they looked at similar items, and if this stuff was true, wouldn't the studies provide the same answers?
Now we do have a number in the second paragraph, 3 times more likely to develop dementia. What's the rate if you don't use these sweeteners? Ok, I'll go look... According to the "Braintest" web site the rate is 6% plus or minus one percent for the US. Are they really reporting that 18% of the sweetener eaters developed dementia? They expect the number of cases to go up as the population increases and gets older. We also learn there are a number of different types of dementia. The best way to deal with this? Of course, use the Brain Test software! Just a click away! (Of course dementia might be pretty normal and we are seeing more of it as the expected ages continue to increase. If the life expectancy is 57, then you are not going to see a lot of 60 year olds with dementia!)
These studies are sure a lot of fun. For people who have spent their entire lives engrossed in what a "healthy" diet is, they are candy for the soul and so easy to believe and propagate. We may be surrounded by modern Frankenstein foods designed by "big food" to kill us all, but these studies don't provide any evidence of anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment