Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to Thread
Guest, we'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the
Diabetes Forum Survey 2024 »
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Ask A Question
Now 7 a day
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dillinger" data-source="post: 512903" data-attributes="member: 13582"><p>The study that they quote consisted of asking people what they ate on 1 day and then following various outcomes in the participants. It was therefore an observational study and took no account of other factors; they merely assumed that the fruit and vegetable consumption lead to improved health outcomes (because, hey everyone knows that fruit and vegetables are healthy). </p><p></p><p>Here is the BBC on this <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26818377" target="_blank">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26818377</a> </p><p></p><p>If a 12 year old had come up with this you would be kind and supportive but point out all the possible problems; the fact that the 'study' was carried out and then immediately they concluded that more fruit and vegetables was better is slightly mind boggling; perhaps it's a counterblast to the Annals of Internal Medicine meta study saying fat has no correlation with heart disease? </p><p></p><p>Here are some problems with this type of issue just off the top of my head; perhaps people who eat more vegetables smoke less, or exercise more, or in a number of other ways behave in a healthy way (indicated by their consumption of lots of fruit and vegetables)? The people who ran the study say that they 'tried to account for that' - but what does that mean? Perhaps the fruit eaters are wealthier than the general population and/or have access to better health care? Perhaps being a fruit eater makes you more likely to go to your doctor regularly? All fruit and vegetables are not equal in macronutrient density; would this work if my 7 portions a day consisted of peaches rather than spinach? Have macronutrient variables been considered? How reliable is a 1 day 'snapshot' of what people say they eat? Might people who are towing the healthy living line be tempted to overestimate their fruit and vegetable consumption whilst people who don't won't? There is obvious selection bias on the part of the people carrying out the study; because they are working on the basis that fruit and vegetables are good for you; therefore more must be better.</p><p></p><p>I'm sure there are more issues.</p><p></p><p>As diabetics fruit is not our friend (small amounts of berries aside); because all fruit has been grown to be sweet and that's something we all have a problem with surely? </p><p></p><p>I'd go so far as to say that this is idiot science for people who like their science as free from facts as possible.</p><p></p><p>Best</p><p></p><p>Dillinger</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dillinger, post: 512903, member: 13582"] The study that they quote consisted of asking people what they ate on 1 day and then following various outcomes in the participants. It was therefore an observational study and took no account of other factors; they merely assumed that the fruit and vegetable consumption lead to improved health outcomes (because, hey everyone knows that fruit and vegetables are healthy). Here is the BBC on this [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-26818377[/url] If a 12 year old had come up with this you would be kind and supportive but point out all the possible problems; the fact that the 'study' was carried out and then immediately they concluded that more fruit and vegetables was better is slightly mind boggling; perhaps it's a counterblast to the Annals of Internal Medicine meta study saying fat has no correlation with heart disease? Here are some problems with this type of issue just off the top of my head; perhaps people who eat more vegetables smoke less, or exercise more, or in a number of other ways behave in a healthy way (indicated by their consumption of lots of fruit and vegetables)? The people who ran the study say that they 'tried to account for that' - but what does that mean? Perhaps the fruit eaters are wealthier than the general population and/or have access to better health care? Perhaps being a fruit eater makes you more likely to go to your doctor regularly? All fruit and vegetables are not equal in macronutrient density; would this work if my 7 portions a day consisted of peaches rather than spinach? Have macronutrient variables been considered? How reliable is a 1 day 'snapshot' of what people say they eat? Might people who are towing the healthy living line be tempted to overestimate their fruit and vegetable consumption whilst people who don't won't? There is obvious selection bias on the part of the people carrying out the study; because they are working on the basis that fruit and vegetables are good for you; therefore more must be better. I'm sure there are more issues. As diabetics fruit is not our friend (small amounts of berries aside); because all fruit has been grown to be sweet and that's something we all have a problem with surely? I'd go so far as to say that this is idiot science for people who like their science as free from facts as possible. Best Dillinger [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post Reply
Home
Forums
Diabetes Discussion
Ask A Question
Now 7 a day
Top
Bottom
Find support, ask questions and share your experiences. Ad free.
Join the community »
This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn More.…