Now, let's set aside the first 3 points that I mentioned, and just look at what blueberry supplementation did
-
Show this thread
-
Here's the table of results. There was no improvement associated with blueberry supplementation in ANY OF THE MEASUREMENTSpic.twitter.com/vbxFHdeWls
1 reply 1 retweet 11 likesShow this thread -
The entire basis of the article that I linked to was a small subgroup analysis of less than half the population that found some marginally significant results for one biomarker of insulin controlpic.twitter.com/VzpRNGTont
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
And we can argue about the importance of this biomarker or the other, but I think it would be better to report that blueberry supplementation has no effect on: - blood sugar - insulin - blood pressure - cholesterol
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
In other words, this study was entirely negative A better headline: "blueberries useless for health, study finds"
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likesShow this thread -
The fact that a totally negative study is being reported as a positive result is emblematic of the power of a catchy press release, because anyone who even glanced at the table of results would realize this was total nonsense
2 replies 3 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
TBH
@nutritionorg I'm a bit surprised that the study was published as is. The discussion made much of the subgroup analysis, but barely even mentioned that there was no improvement on any of the primary or secondary outcomes in the main study itself1 reply 1 retweet 9 likesShow this thread -
I should say, the positive findings were entirely based on an analysis in statin nonusers who comprised only 50% of the study population, which also breaks randomization ping
@dnunan79@MatthewJDalby@kcklatt2 replies 0 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
I also literally do not understand this COI statement. How can the funders have had no say on the research protocol if the first and second authors are advisers to the funding body?????pic.twitter.com/7lfQJwVDIZ
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @GidMK
It's research as marketing material. Few food industry groups funds diet health research without expecting to sell more of their product because of it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
I agree wholeheartedly, which begs the question why it's being published in a leading nutrition journal
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
The American Journal of Cynical Nutrition? Maybe brown envelopes full of blueberries have exchanged hands.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MatthewJDalby
Lol maybe I'm overreaching, I thought it was a pretty important journal
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.