Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by oaijdsfoaijsf 3172 days ago
Even without the data quality issues, there are obvious uncontrolled confounding factors. I don't understand how a real scientist can title this study "Dietary Carbohydrates Impair . . ." when the finding is actually "Dietary Carbohydrates Are Associated With Impaired . . ." Clear evidence that statistical training (or perhaps just incentives) for scientists remains insufficient.

What's really surprising is how many people on here are like, "of course, ketogenic diets!" Where is all the skepticism that is so vividly on display when discussing the latest Google or Facebook product announcement?

1 comments

Because they explain the causal link. See the paragraph beginning with, "Most dietary carbohydrates relevant for human nutrition contain the monosaccharide D-glucose".
Countless studies show that consuming refined sugars alone has very different effects on the body than consuming complex carbohydrates along with the fiber found in natural foods. This is like saying that all protein contains glutamate so there's no difference between eating a steak or a tablespoon full of refined MSG.
I think their claim is that most carbs are mostly made out of D-glucose. And that excessive amounts of it cause your insulin based signalling cascade to go wrong.

I'm sure that encapsulating your carbs in a nice hard-to-unwrap cellulose structure slows the release of this D-glucose stuff and gives your body's control loop more chance to cope. But at this point we're arguing about the details of the causal link.