Creatine supplements not very convincing. Anything more convincing out there? https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40279-015-0337-4 …pic.twitter.com/bdkZHURfv3
Not very convincing IMO. I remain skeptical. Tons of tiny small sample studies being cited in favor of something? With obvious commercial interests? No pre-registered large studies? This stuff is not likely to be a representative dataset of all existing data.
-
-
Creatine is very cheap, old and readily-available everywhere. Plus, there are RCTs and a very clear biological pathway involved and demonstrated. I'm relatively skeptical as well, but it is cheap as fuck and does make you look slightly ripped.
-
Tweet unavailable
-
What about large animal studies for it? If it works in e.g. n = 500 rat study, I am more inclined.
-
Yes, I think they acknowledge the necessity of such studies and that there is a large scientific gap to filled in order for these effects to be credible.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is a nice meta-analysis with funnel plots and all. The small effect in general but seems robusthttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5679696/ …
-
"The small effect in general but seems robust" <-- dangerous conclusion! This is what social psych people say all the time, only to then be disproven in big pre-reg study.
-
I tend to agree, but I think the priors against smallish-but robust-effects in social psych are different. In this case, we've got reasonable biological pathways, bioavailability studies, etc. The world of social psych is hellbend on armchair folk psychology causal intuitions.
-
And that makes me slightly more biased against accepting small but robust effects in social psychology. There are more flexible ontological moving parts that could be responsible for these effects
- 5 more 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.