If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On 21/05/2012 10:22 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2012 21:48:28 -0300, James wrote: [...] Actually, my little TROLL, you wouldn't know real science, or a real scientist, if you were hit in the head with it. Actually I've been working in medical science (electrocardiology) for 40 years doing programming and statistics. I know a little about science and how it's done. Then you're probably part of the problem. I don't suppose you have any evidence for that. Are you that desperate to find an insult that you pull stuff outta your ass? And being "discredited" by idiots, fakes, frauds, liars and cheats is a badge of honor. That's a lot of good scientists you're tarring here. That's what *should* be done to them: they should be tarred and feathered. Read Duesberg's book and find out why. [...] Because time doesn't cure stupid. Does anyone compare to you? As long as I don't compare to you, I'm a happy camper. I'd say you must be ecstatic. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman -- -jw |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
James Warren wrote:
Actually I've been working in medical science (electrocardiology) for 40 years doing programming and statistics. I know a little about science and how it's done. Then you know Atkins was a cardiologist and it was his clinical experiences with the failure of the low fat suggestions that led him to pursue low carb. And that when he tried to publish his tabular data it was refused because it wasn't double blind. As you are now also insisting on double blind I'll agree with Dogman that you are indeed a part of the problem. Statistical tabular evidence is valid in science. Read (again) Gregor Mendell's original study on inheritance in pea plants. I suggest this time you go for the audio version on librivox.org. He never did publish that data and now that he's dead it's gone. Rather like the story of Nikoli Tesla in that particular. I think he should have published it posthumously but he didn't and there's little evidence that he continued gathering tabular data once he switched from trying to publish in journals to successfully publishing in the popular press. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On May 21, 1:23*pm, James Warren wrote:
On 21/05/2012 12:16 PM, Doug Freyburger wrote: James Warren wrote: That is a very narrow minded position. If LC works as well as it seems to work and is safe, then the world at large needs to know about it. The entrenched regimes needs to change. The best way to do that is to overwhelm them with solid evidence. Solid evidence - Go to the mall and look for fat people. *If you see more than the ancient 10% percentage of obesity that's the result of decades of low fat pressure. *This is very simple not rocket science. The entrenched regime needs to be attacked on intellectual and organizational levels. *Endless low carb studies have been coming out for over a decade and they are a part of the solution, but only a part. Those studies are small and the results only suggestive. The critics can always say "yeah, but". We need to eliminate all criticism by good, large studies. Looking around the mall and then pointing to what they are eating is only a plausibility argument. Such arguments need experimental verification. -- -jw The studies are not all small. The best example of a large study was the LC data extracted from the Framingham study that went on for decades. It showed among other things that heart attack rates increased with glycemic load. But most of those people were probably still eating a diet a lot higher in carbs than what many of us are eating. The part I most disagree with is that you're somehow going to eliminate all criticism by good, large, studies. I don't see any one, two, ten more studies settling anything, let alone eliminating all criticism. Haven't you seen the endless studies coming out every year on a whole host of dietary issues and their linkage to obesity, CHD, lifespan, cancer, etc? You'll have a study or two that suggests some strong linkage to X. About 5 or 10 years later another study comes out that can't confirm it or refutes it. That has been going on forever, with just a few exceptions. The problem is that you can't rigorously control what people eat, what medications they take, how they live, etc by putting them in cages like rats. In the real world there are so many variables that there is always going to be uncertainty in any data and conclusions you extract. More studies would be a good thing, I just doubt it will settle anything, at least for the foreseeable future. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On 5/22/2012 11:49 AM, Doug Freyburger wrote:
James Warren wrote: Actually I've been working in medical science (electrocardiology) for 40 years doing programming and statistics. I know a little about science and how it's done. Then you know Atkins was a cardiologist and it was his clinical experiences with the failure of the low fat suggestions that led him to pursue low carb. And that when he tried to publish his tabular data it was refused because it wasn't double blind. I did not come to LC through Atkins but Gary Taubes. I have not looked into any of Atkin's work. Once something has become established then contradicting evidence needs to be of a somewhat higher standard than that for establishing the thing in the first place, even if the established thing became established on dubious grounds. That is because it is assumed that contradictory studies are more likely to contain errors than the set of confirming studies. It is hard to see how diet can be double blind by eating normally acquired foods. It can only be done, it seems to me, be creating special foods that look and taste the same but have different compositions. I don't even know if that is possible. I wonder if Atkin's work was not published for other reasons like small sample sizes and low power or non random assignment to groups. As you are now also insisting on double blind I'll agree with Dogman that you are indeed a part of the problem. Statistical tabular evidence is valid in science. Read (again) Gregor Mendell's original study on inheritance in pea plants. I suggest this time you go for the audio version on librivox.org. Double blind is not likely possible. But long duration random assignment studies with high compliance rates can be done. These would be very convincing. He never did publish that data and now that he's dead it's gone. Rather like the story of Nikoli Tesla in that particular. I think he should have published it posthumously but he didn't and there's little evidence that he continued gathering tabular data once he switched from trying to publish in journals to successfully publishing in the popular press. Enough hints were there to have justified a study even if his original works were not published. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
|
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On Tue, 22 May 2012 09:14:31 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote: [...] Overall science has done a pretty remarkable job... ....IN SPITE of the many frauds, fakirs, phonies, criminals, ignoramuses, and arrogant greedy *******s who claim to practice it. I will never understand why people automatically put doctors and scientists on such a high pedestal. They're human beings, and all human beings suffer from the same vices, whether they are doctors, scientists, accountants, politicians, TV anchors, football coaches, priests, teachers, farm workers, businessmen, or Wal-Mart clerks. -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On Tue, 22 May 2012 12:49:07 -0300, James Warren
wrote: [...] Yes I agree that Framingham is very suggestive. Cholesterol and Saturated Fat Prevent Heart Disease, Evidence From 101 Scientific Papers, by David Evans. http://www.amazon.com/Cholesterol-Sa...7703257&sr=1-1 Feel free to critique all 101 papers. You might find one to your liking. You've managed to convince yourself that HIV causes AIDS, that HPV causes cervical cancer, yet you've never read even one scientific paper that proves it, because there aren't any. I don't exactly know what lead you to your sudden conversion to low-carb from the Standard American Diet, etc., but I doubt it was a controlled, randomized scientific study, or because your doctor recommended it. So...what was it? -- Dogman "I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I'm not absolutely sure of anything" - Richard Feynman |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On 5/22/2012 1:57 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2012 09:14:31 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: [...] Overall science has done a pretty remarkable job... ...IN SPITE of the many frauds, fakirs, phonies, criminals, ignoramuses, and arrogant greedy *******s who claim to practice it. There aren't as many as you seem to think. That is because it is hard to get away with fraud and criminal acts. Other scientists are constantly replicating other's work. Fraud and crimes are sooner or later revealed and then the reputation is lost. I will never understand why people automatically put doctors and scientists on such a high pedestal. They're human beings, and all human beings suffer from the same vices, whether they are doctors, scientists, accountants, politicians, TV anchors, football coaches, priests, teachers, farm workers, businessmen, or Wal-Mart clerks. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On 5/22/2012 2:09 PM, Dogman wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2012 12:49:07 -0300, James Warren wrote: [...] Yes I agree that Framingham is very suggestive. Cholesterol and Saturated Fat Prevent Heart Disease, Evidence From 101 Scientific Papers, by David Evans. http://www.amazon.com/Cholesterol-Sa...7703257&sr=1-1 Feel free to critique all 101 papers. You might find one to your liking. You've managed to convince yourself that HIV causes AIDS, that HPV causes cervical cancer, yet you've never read even one scientific paper that proves it, because there aren't any. I don't exactly know what lead you to your sudden conversion to low-carb from the Standard American Diet, etc., but I doubt it was a controlled, randomized scientific study, or because your doctor recommended it. So...what was it? It was a plausibility argument that made it worth a try. This is not enough to change an entrenched regime though. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Slowly, ever so slowly, the worm turns.
On May 22, 12:57*pm, Dogman wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2012 09:14:31 -0700 (PDT), " wrote: [...] Overall science has done a pretty remarkable job... ...IN SPITE of the many frauds, fakirs, phonies, criminals, ignoramuses, and arrogant greedy *******s who claim to practice it. Hmm, this from the guy who thinks Duesburg is some kind of God and authority on HIV and AIDS? I will never understand why people automatically put doctors and scientists on such a high pedestal. They're human beings, and all human beings suffer from the same vices, whether they are doctors, scientists, accountants, politicians, TV anchors, football coaches, priests, teachers, farm workers, businessmen, or Wal-Mart clerks. -- Dogman I have no doubt that you will indeed never understand it. That's OK, most of the thinking world does. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Eating slowly | jjrb230 via WeightAdviser.com | General Discussion | 4 | August 21st, 2006 06:30 PM |
Slowly, slowly | Alan | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 13 | October 26th, 2005 02:49 PM |
Shrinking slowly! | sandy | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 0 | October 9th, 2004 08:00 PM |
Is low-carbing successful if you go slowly?? | wilson | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 14 | March 9th, 2004 12:49 AM |
changing slowly | Susan Jones-Anderson | General Discussion | 16 | October 3rd, 2003 01:01 AM |