Epidemiology is Crap

With the fairly recent release of the new study saying that eggs are bad for heart health (contradicting the last one), I want to explain why I think epidemiology is crap.

The original egg study

Zhong et al. Associations of Dietary Cholesterol or Egg Consumption With Incident Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality. JAMA 2019.

Undark Article

Open Letter to the National Academies

A Discussion of the Refutation of Memory-Based Dietary Assessment Methods (M-BMs): The Rhetorical Defense of Pseudoscientific and Inadmissible Evidence.

Arab et al. paper on repeat food recalls

Denise Minger dismantling the China Study

My Site

My Store

Protein controversies article

The Protein Book

[flolou]

Other variables that are impossible to measure scientifically as well are:

1) The role of sleep and how not getting enough skews your metabolic health

2) The inconsistent soil health which translates into the health of the food supply

3) The levels of stress in any given year or month in a person's life, which has small to large
influences on your nutritional health,

[maxgrinder]

Lyle, keep coming out with material. You are the only one I trust in the fitness industry.

[sml]

So when is the debate between you and Bart happening?

[MohammadHosseini-hwnx]

In order for a nutritional assessment tool to be effective in assessing intakes of macro's and micro's it needs to be both reliable and viable. Somthing that is has been proven about FFQ so instead of completely disregarding nutrition studies we can instead focus on those that are conducted properly.

[snoflake]

4:13 Aren’t you capable of writing that well during hypomania? 💪😎

[vibhavk]

your points done hold true there is something called accounting for confounding factor in epidemiology

[SquirelUK]

Brilliant, what I have thought for years.

[vibhavk]

yeah so you also might not be agreeing that smoking causes lung cancer because of epidemiology