tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post6209792462207498862..comments2024-03-19T07:48:54.021-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: Stossel on the Food PoliceGus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-77361157932931903442012-04-27T02:00:08.260-06:002012-04-27T02:00:08.260-06:00Steve,
I agree, qualitative does not necessarily ...Steve,<br /><br />I agree, qualitative does not necessarily equal subjective any more than quantitative necessarily equals objective.<br /><br />GusGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-78356065764212324792012-04-26T17:28:44.291-06:002012-04-26T17:28:44.291-06:00Jennifer:
I like your idea of informal experiment...Jennifer:<br /><br />I like your idea of informal experimentation and I would extend your method to many other areas of life. And also, I wouldn’t say your method is unscientific, just the opposite I think, since it’s based on collecting data to derive a conclusion. It’s just not rigorous or quantitative but it’s the best you can do since as you pointed out; you have only one data point and you can’t really put a number to it. But just because your data is qualitative does not mean your conclusions are subjective. Qualitative does NOT mean subjective.<br />There is also the placebo effect to consider and it can be quite strong. It’s possible that you can convince yourself you will feel better and so that makes you feel better. I’m betting this is quite common with diets as it is with medicine. Not necessarily a bad thing but something to think about.Steve Dnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-16300205819474670922012-04-26T17:10:28.688-06:002012-04-26T17:10:28.688-06:00Fair enough.Fair enough.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-83969847348251784272012-04-26T10:07:20.018-06:002012-04-26T10:07:20.018-06:00I'm ignoring news that X is bad for you becaus...I'm ignoring news that X is bad for you because I've already pretty much established what general foods are bad for ME. I'm now in the "what can I add to optimize my diet?" stage rather than "what should I eliminate?"<br /><br />That's all.Jennifer Snowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00039865566870992465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-47288029226678338832012-04-25T17:22:09.436-06:002012-04-25T17:22:09.436-06:00Jennifer,
I wouldn't go so far as to ignore A...Jennifer,<br /><br />I wouldn't go so far as to ignore ANY pronouncement that something is bad, but I would look at the reasons behind it in the same way as I would those which hold that something is good.<br /><br />That said, although I dislike the term N=1 in this context, as I see it too frequently used to insinuate that something is more scientific than it actually is, your practice of informal experimentation is fine, and can a good way to account for experts with differing opinions and/or any relevant genetic differences you may have from the general population. It sounds like that approach has worked for you.<br /><br />Steve,<br /><br />That's a good point.<br /><br />GusGus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-23196820399324090712012-04-25T10:53:54.844-06:002012-04-25T10:53:54.844-06:00Regarding your statement about most research findi...Regarding your statement about most research findings being incorrect, I believe a more fundamental issue concerns how they are interpreted. It’s a subtle but important difference. The data may be telling them something but not what they think it is. I've noticed that conclusions, especially in the ‘softer’ (read – more complex) sciences often reach far beyond what the data actually says.Steve Dnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-75692795111693565492012-04-25T07:12:49.474-06:002012-04-25T07:12:49.474-06:00I've been tweaking my diet a lot lately, and I...I've been tweaking my diet a lot lately, and I've come up with a rule of thumb that at least seems to be working pretty well:<br /><br />I ignore anything that says X is "bad for you".<br /><br />If I run across something that says X is beneficial, I'll look at the evidence and try to see if the proponents know WHY X is good for you.<br /><br />I'll look for disinterested testimonials from, say, other blogs or commentors.<br /><br />If all that adds up and it doesn't contradict something that's ALREADY working for me, I'll give it a try for a week or two. If I feel good or better, I'll keep doing it. If I feel worse, I'll drop it.<br /><br />Now, this is unscientific, or at best it's an N=1 experiment, but I am feeling a lot better these days since I've taken an interest in paying attention to my health and improving it. I've also lost quite a bit of weight thus far, I'm not hungry, and my chronic health problems have pretty much vanished.Jennifer Snowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00039865566870992465noreply@blogger.com