“Every day is April Fool’s in nutrition.” Chocolate accelerates weight loss.

phoenix

Expert
Messages
5,671
Type of diabetes
Type 1
Treatment type
Pump
http://www.express.co.uk/life-style...ss-lowers-blood-cholesterol-aids-better-sleep
(not the only newspaper to report this)
Sounds good , but according to this it shows just how easy it is to convince the press that you have valid trial with valid results.(and I'm assuming that this is true, I haven't followed it up so that's bad)
http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800

Some good pointers to look for when looking at claimed results from research

edit follow up from the Washington Post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...to-thinking-chocolate-makes-you-thin/?hpid=z5
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Robbity

Expert
Messages
6,683
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
If only... indeed! I'm not sure I would have been persuaded, since a whole bar of chocolate for me (now!!) would have contained too many carbs and calories to be a realistic slimming option.

It's a pity journalists aren't taught to have nasty suspicious minds. I've come to believe they're not much better than a flock of woolly brained sheep. If something sounds too good to be true it usually is. :D:wideyed:

Robbity
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
G

graj0

Guest
I think the very first warning was the simple fact that it was in a newspaper and even worse than that, it was the Express, not exactly known for it's accurate reporting of medical matters.

I think one of the problems with the research that they are supposed to be reporting is that they are looking at three different groups of people. If you wanted to compare the effect of eating chocolate, surely you'd have to get the same people to try LC, then LC with chocolate and then a third session without any change in diet.

One thing I noticed further down is they say you can eat chocolate but must exercise as well, so that makes it different to the LC non chocolate group. As it was only 42 gms of dark chocolate, that's about 180 calories, a bit of exercise could easily burn that up and more.

So a few flaws in their research, now I've read the second link, I think they could have tried harder to make it more convincing. I've not read the Washington Post Link yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

CollieBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,974
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Dislikes
Hi carb Foods
It's a pity journalists aren't taught to have nasty suspicious minds. I've come to believe they're not much better than a flock of woolly brained sheep. If something sounds too good to be true it usually is. :D:wideyed:

Robbity
Now there will be flocks of sheep, wandering around, insulted that they have been compared to journalists:p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people

Robbity

Expert
Messages
6,683
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Now there will be flocks of sheep, wandering around, insulted that they have been compared to journalists:p

My apologies in general then to any flocks of sheep who might have felt insulted, but I think the woolly brained lot may well not be aware of any such insults, intended or otherwise...:D

Robbity
Who never in her life believed she'd ever end up apologizing to a sheep!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

CollieBoy

Well-Known Member
Messages
2,974
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Diet only
Dislikes
Hi carb Foods
My apologies in general then to any flocks of sheep who might have felt insulted, but I think the woolly brained lot may well not be aware of any such insults, intended or otherwise...:D

Robbity
Who never in her life believed she'd ever end up apologizing to a sheep!
Flossie the sheep says "Don't compare us to those Bahh- sturts":wideyed:
 

Ali H

Well-Known Member
Messages
790
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Insulin
I think the very first warning was the simple fact that it was in a newspaper and even worse than that, it was the Express, not exactly known for it's accurate reporting of medical matters.

I think one of the problems with the research that they are supposed to be reporting is that they are looking at three different groups of people. If you wanted to compare the effect of eating chocolate, surely you'd have to get the same people to try LC, then LC with chocolate and then a third session without any change in diet.

One thing I noticed further down is they say you can eat chocolate but must exercise as well, so that makes it different to the LC non chocolate group. As it was only 42 gms of dark chocolate, that's about 180 calories, a bit of exercise could easily burn that up and more.

So a few flaws in their research, now I've read the second link, I think they could have tried harder to make it more convincing. I've not read the Washington Post Link yet.

It was numerous media sources across 20 countries that reported on it!!!!