Title : Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you
link : Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you
Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you
Share the post "Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue "
Kevin Hall, the principal investigator of the NIH recently published an article in AJCN that has received much media attention. This study, according to him, completely refutes the hypothesis of insulin so completely that it is now "dead". That's interesting, I thought, as I sat down to read the article.
It was a little surprising, therefore, to read this document and realize that the conclusions of Hall were entirely his own opinion. He suffers so badly from confirmation bias that may well have written "My mind is already made up about the hypothesis of insulin. Please do not confuse me with facts." Confirmation bias is a psychological phenomenon known by which the facts are according to their pre-formed opinion is accepted as true and which are not, ignored. All events that took filtered through this bias to confirm your pre-existing opinion. It is also known as a closed mind.
This occurs much more often than is commonly thought or admitted. A similar situation exists in the research behind the effect of losing weight breakfast . The researchers used this issue of the proposed effect of breakfast on obesity (PEBO) to look at how researchers consistently interpret results based on their beliefs. If they thought made breakfast lose weight, then studies to support this view were interpreted, even if he did not. Research lack probative value (RLPV) (data association can not prove anything) and biased research reports (BRR) -
Two specific tactics are used. As more and more people believe that something is true, the effect is compounded because all research is now interpreted to fit preconceived facts. 
From the preconception of "A", all research is interpreted to support this belief (B), and all negative studies (C are taken into account ). This only reinforces the belief (D) which in turn leads to biased reporting research. This, of course, is a vicious circle. The same effect is evident in the calories in, calories out recalcitrant (CICO).
So, let's take a closer look at this document and its claims. The document is entitled " energy expenditure and body composition changes after a ketogenic diet isocaloric in overweight and obese men ". I'll give you some background. The award-winning science journalist Gary Taubes believes that obesity is essentially a disease of excess insulin - hyperinsulinemia. Since refined carbohydrates stimulate more than fat or protein insulin, carbohydrates reduce that will lead to greater fat loss.
The non-profit organization Nusi was created to raise money to fund research and this paper is the first published. 17 overweight men were admitted to a metabolic ward where all the food they ate were carefully measured. There was an implementation phase of every 4 weeks to establish a baseline, where men eat a high carbohydrate diet high in sugar and then switched to a low carb carefully designed, low-sugar diet. then, several steps were taken, including energy expenditure (EE - the amount of calories your body is burning) during the next 4 weeks. The basic question is this? - Not a ketogenic diet (KD) causes fat loss 
Here it is the result. During the four weeks KD, yes there was a loss of fat. There was an initial period of increased weight loss that everyone agrees can be some diuresis. We also agree that insulin levels were brought down by the KD. Second, the use of EE measures was an increase of calories burned. Those are all facts, not opinions, derived directly from the study. Is not that a good result?
Well, if you're Kevin Hall, no. You need to find a way to spin this in a negative way. Then you can tell all your friends in the media so that you can declare 'I was right'. Let's see how this was done.
When patients embarked on his career in stage, were changed to a / high day sugar high carbohydrate diet 2,700 calories, intended to replicate the standard American diet (SAD) that caused the epidemic obesity. Nobody really believes that this is a healthy diet, and nobody believes that should cause fat loss. But he did. Why? Anyone who has done research knows why. It is the effect of entering a study and knowing that people you are testing. It is a universal effect. That is the exact reason why we have phased management. To establish a baseline of adequate study when people know they are being watched.
Therefore, people lose weight with this diet SAD. But instead of using this new baseline, Hall decides that the downward trend is the new baseline. The tacit assumption or premise is that if these people had taken another 4 weeks of the SAD, which continue to lose weight at the same pace indefinitely. WHAT? Are you crazy? That is completely illogical.
Take a similar situation. Suppose you are teaching mathematics. We teach a semester without proof, no examination, no checking of the task and there are no projects. Students simply are supposed to spend 1 hour of class and one hour of homework a day. Everyone says they do. Then, behind them, we tried them on a standardized test. They do very badly and score of 65%.
Next semester, we daily tests, a final exam, as well as the daily check of the task. They still spend 1 hour of class and one hour of homework. Scores should be theoretically unchanged, because they were doing the same amount of work. Of course, in reality this is completely untrue. Because they know we're checking them regularly, they do a better job. Now write down 80%
This is the same effect we see when people go into a studio. No matter what we are measuring, things get better simply by entering a study. It happens to blood pressure, blood sugar, cholesterol, diet, depression - all. But the results do not improve indefinitely. It is a benefit once. Student scores could improve from 65 to 80 in a semester. This does not mean that the other half of the test will raise their scores to 95. Instead, it is likely to stay in 80. But this is exactly what makes Hall -. It assumes that this benefit once persist indefinitely
By making this assumption that the SAD diet will cause fat loss (which tells us that logic is false) can cause a positive result negative. So, yes, KD does not cause fat loss, but does not increase fat loss and then you can make this conclusion. Since most journalists Hall friends not read the newspaper and only short, it is easy to convince them.
According to the hypothesis of corridors, therefore, you should just keep eating the SAD with 25% sugar and expect to lose weight indefinitely. Ahead. Look what happens. I already know it. You too. You'll get fat, get diabetes type 2, and then eventually, you put on dialysis and cut their feet when they go gangrenous. But at least Hall can say he was right. 
The second important question is regarding EE. When you change the basal diet to KD, the number of calories that stays the same. If cause continuous weight loss, then you could expect to see an increase in EE for the body to lose weight. This is called a metabolic advantage. Surprise, surprise - that's exactly what happened. So how you can spin this? With language.
Look how Hall described the increase in EE absolutely critical. Here's what he writes "KD agreed with increased EE camera (57 ± 13 kcal / day P = 0, 0004) and SEE (89 ± 14 kcal / day P <0.0001) "(emphasis mine). Hall is saying that it was mere coincidence that patients are burning an extra 57 calories per day. W.T.F ??? There is nothing casual about it. They are switched to a KD. EE increased. The p-value of 0.0004 means there is a 99.96% possibility that this is not a coincidence. Hall knows as well as I do. It is basic statistics 101. Hall, a mathematician is surely aware of it. 
Hall is saying "Oh, change your diet to test whether EE increase. It really was just a huge coincidence that the 17 men simultaneously increased overall EE exactly at the time I thought it would be. Ignore this, guys. Just write your newspaper article about how this shows that did not happen. "
therefore EE increases and yes, the effect decreased over time. What did you expect? That things would continue indefinitely in a straight line? Life does not work that way. Hall had assumed that this would happen by the loss of fat during SAD, but then rightly points out that the US does not. If it does not, in any case, my friend. Get a clue.
The reason why the US is so critically important is that this is the key to lasting weight loss. Hall had just been profiled in cover of the New York Times EE measurement of Biggest Loser contestants. The reason why all their weight was regained his US slowed to such an extent that calorie reduction could not keep up. Therefore, an intervention as a ketogenic diet that increases EE huge, great news that . Except, of course, if you are Kevin Hall, because it means you were wrong. And they care more about his reputation than the health and welfare of people. 
Dr. David Ludwig , a researcher at a little place called Harvard had shown exactly the same thing in his study from 2012 . This study also analyzed the difference in energy expenditure following different dietary strategies. Again, as was demonstrated Hall, the US is better with a very low carbohydrate diet. So study halls merely confirmed what is already known.
Some people have also noted that this study controlled calories thereby nullifying one of the biggest advantages of KD, which is that it makes you feel full. Well, sorry, guys, that's not the question that is designed to respond. The same applies to the fact that there are only 17 people in it. Again, this is the design of the study, so it is what it is, and there is no use complaining about it.
Finally, the main problem is not the study data. The data are excellent. The problem is the 'spin'. Here is the Hall conclusion writes in the conclusion of the summary (which is more important than a few phrases of the paper, which everyone reads)
The isocaloric KD
was not accompanied by fat loss increased body but was associated with relatively smallincreases in EEwho were near detection limits using the latest technology.
I've highlighted what is a fact. I crossed out what is pure spin. The loss of body fat KD cause? He did. And that is very, very important. Hall turns this positive to negative type moving the goalposts -. "Oh, but did no better than before People who eat a diet of 25% sugar will continue indefinitely lose fat at the same pace." Umm ... What planet are you, Kevin Hall?
Then he said that the increase in EE is "relatively small." And that? Did it improve or not? In fact, his own studio from the biggest loser suggests that weight loss reduced calorie constant decrease EE, so even stabilization (not to mention the increase) of the EA is critical. That's the gold medal, Buddy! You just throw them away.
then Hall, downplays this relationship by calling him a "partnership". As if the change in the US just happened to occur while the change in diet. What a load of rubbish. It has changed the diet and measured the change in EE. No one doubts that. It is causality, pure and simple. So why try to spin this as a "partnership" is a mere "coincidence"? pure rotation.
Hall then also tries to minimize the importance of stable EE saying it is "near detection limits using cutting edge technology." And that? Who cares? Or is stabilize it? Not that great news? Do not just show that weight loss efforts fail due to decreased EE?
Unfortunately, Hall spin-doctor is entering a free zone logic, and many journalists like Julia Belluz and other bloggers are willing to take what is shared at face value . "In this study Loser first big show why stable EE is the most critical for weight loss factor. In this second study I will show how stable EE is absolutely useless. TA DA!" Hall wants desperately to save his own reputation, even if you have to sacrifice your health to do so. Sad. So sad.
The facts alone, without any rotation would be. A ketogenic independent calorie diet causes fat loss and causes an increase (or at least stabilization) in EE. Those are the facts. And I love it. Because I can use this fact to help cure patients and save lives. Luckily, I can see the presentation of blatantly biased reports Clueless Kevin Hall so it is -. The last gasp of the paradigm of death that all calories are equal
Share the post "Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue"
The post Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you appeared first on https://intensivedietarymanagement.com/heres-5-kevin-hall-go-buy-clue/
Thanks for Reading Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you
You are now reading the article Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you Url Address https://exerciseplanstoloseweight.blogspot.com/2016/07/here-5-kevin-hall-go-buy-yourself-clue.html
0 Response to "Here's $ 5, Kevin Hall, go buy yourself a clue you"
Posting Komentar