A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
This research is an observational study, which can only show a statistical association, not a direct cause-and-effect relationship
quick cheat sheet: if a study involves diet there is a 99% chance it is epidemiological and about as reliable as astrology.
The Guardian is no exception when it comes to sensationalism and not presenting research findings objectively.
So basically: smarter people drink less sodas?
More like richer people drink less sodas and rich people tend to have the slowest mental decline for a number of reasons that are pretty difficult to control for, like good healthcare.
... the study’s participants – 12,772 civil servants in Brazil, with an average age of 52 – who were followed up for on average eight years.
That's a really good sample size, and a plenty long follow up period, but do we know whether they've factored out "living in Brazil" or "being a civil servant"?
Nah, it's not really a useful study. There's no real control, and the types of artificial sweeteners they are tracking aren't even chemically similar to each other.
What we absolutely know is that artificial sweeteners help people consume much less sugar, and that diabetes absolutely does have a causal relation to a decline in overall mental health.
I can’t speak to this research’s validity, but a fair few sweeteners absolutely ruin my digestive system, I’ve had to become pretty adept at spotting products with them in
YES, it's like running a gauntlet these days I swear, no one wants regular sugar? I do.
By my calculations, I have the brain of a 172 year old.
first i have to live under fascism now they want to take my diet coke away T_T
My brain is yelling at me to get off my lawn