Important point: if your entire argument is made using rodent studies, you are likely cherry-picking BY DEFAULT
-
Show this thread
-
For example: two papers, one showing meat eating = weight gain the other the opposite (in rats) Weight loss: https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=meat+weight+rat&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3DXqzraBfsRmAJ … Weight gain: https://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=meat+weight+gain+rat&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&p=&u=%23p%3Dms6-qKjdxsoJ …
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likesShow this thread -
This is because many preclinical findings are tested in rodents first. And regardless of whether it turns out to be useful later on, you often see at least one with a positive result
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread
The exception to this is when you're arguing "we've got lots of rodent studies that evidence this conclusion let's test it in humans to see if it works"
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.