Lastly -- kid1dakota -- is it possible, as buselmo was saying, that the causality of metabolic syndrome is not diet soda? I'd venture to guess a lot of fat or obese people tend to drink diet soda, so could these studies be wrong because people who tend to drink diet soda = people who tend to already have diabetes or other weight issues, so it doesn't apply to regular joes? Do they control for the sample in these studies to get cross-sections of population?
Alright;
I have been meaning to write something for a long time on this board on studies.What is relevant and what is bogus(which I have seen a lot of cut and pasted onto this board) etc...What criteria makes a study hold weight amongst peers in healthcare or in the scientific community etc..
My first week of Chiropractic school I had an instructor say "If you are going to be healthcare professionals the first thing you need to learn is what is credible information and what is bogus and where to find it.You need to be able to state where you got your information which needs to come from credible sources."
"I heard"... "they say"... and especially "hear say" or "bro-science" on message boards is not credible information.I understand the chemicals being used in bodybuilding don't have a whole lot of testing behind them.Also they are being used in supraphysiological doses and some being used outside the scope of which the are intended.This is even more the reason to be cautious about where and who you get your information.
Some foul mouthed idiot saying "fuck it dude bros I have pinned a gram a day with used pins and me and my bros have never got an abcess so don't worry and it never happens" is the type shit going around and unfortunately taken to heart by some.
I am also seeing a lot of guys knocking or disregarding very credible information that is posted from very credible sources that hold up amongst the best in the medical community.Yet some guy on an internet message board that is not even a healthcare professional flat out refutes it or has the odasity to refer to it as "just some study" and it false.Another good one using the " its not true because this hasn't applied to anyone he/she knows " ?!?!?!
What is a credible study?
First is a peer reviewed published medical journal: This is a long process that is nit picked by unknown peers in your profession.This is a long process and very thorough.
So silencer says "the causality of metabolic syndrome is not diet soda? I'd venture to guess a lot of fat or obese people tend to drink diet soda, so could these studies be wrong because people who tend to drink diet soda = people who tend to already have diabetes or other weight issues, so it doesn't apply to regular joes? Do they control for the sample in these studies to get cross-sections of population?"
All that was addressed believe me!! that study posted was a peer reviewed published journal.You think a bunch of Doctors putting in time and resources didn't think to use a good cross section? come on!
Most of the journals from pubmed are gold standard in the industry as it is stuff posted from JAMA,NEJM,etc..
Next is university studies from an accreditted Universities.They are studies from leading researchers in the world that are working as instructors and have a lot of resources and are held to very high standards.
So to sum it up:
when you post up a study or comment on a study you should understand what is credible.
1) peer reviewed published medical journals
2) University studies (accreditted only)
One last note as I have seen a lot of stuff posted that used rats,mice and or a test tube studies.A lot of times that is where science starts in animals or in a test tube but until it passes human clinical trials more information and testing is needed for conclusion.