Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

laconicsax

(14,860 posts)
Sat Jun 16, 2012, 01:34 AM Jun 2012

Hey, remember that recent "HFCS makes you stupid" study?

Last edited Mon Jun 18, 2012, 01:16 AM - Edit history (2)

Well, I finally got around to reading the actual study and what do you know--that isn't at all what the study says.

http://jp.physoc.org/content/590/10/2485.long

Turns out that the study was about the effects of metabolic dysfunction and whether Omega 3 fatty acids can counteract its effects.

You had two groups of rats with metabolic dysfunction: one which was fed n-3 fatty acids and one which wasn't. The n-3 group didn't experience the same cognitive and physical problems as the control group.

Where does HFCS enter into the picture? The rats were provided with a 15% fructose solution to drink.

So while the results of the study were that n-3 fatty acids can help return the body to metabolic homeostasis, we're all told by shrieking morons that the study proved that HFCS makes you stupid.

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hey, remember that recent "HFCS makes you stupid" study? (Original Post) laconicsax Jun 2012 OP
HFCS? I have no idea what HCFS is. Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #1
High fructose corn syrup. nt TheWraith Jun 2012 #6
That would be HFCS. So what the heck is HCFS? Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #7
HCFS is the stuff... Silent3 Jun 2012 #8
Have you never had high-corn fructose syrup? laconicsax Jun 2012 #9
The general rule appears to be JoeyT Jun 2012 #2
LOL, I notice you posted in the Health group EvolveOrConvolve Jun 2012 #3
I doubt it. laconicsax Jun 2012 #5
Apparently it's only skepticscott Jun 2012 #4
Well... Ron Obvious Jul 2012 #10

JoeyT

(6,785 posts)
2. The general rule appears to be
Sat Jun 16, 2012, 09:08 AM
Jun 2012

that there's an inverse correlation between the hysteria with which someone repeats the findings of a study and their actual understanding of that study. That same inverse correlation exists between the hysteria and willingness to be told what the study is actually about by people that bothered to go and read it.

I'm not even sure where people keep getting these articles with such a crap understanding of science. Probably somewhere like Infowars.

 

laconicsax

(14,860 posts)
5. I doubt it.
Sun Jun 17, 2012, 12:57 AM
Jun 2012

It's funny how people don't recognize a study they've already seen when it's actual methods and results are posted.

It's almost like science reporting is done by people with less understanding of what they're writing than your average creationist.

 

Ron Obvious

(6,261 posts)
10. Well...
Mon Jul 9, 2012, 12:26 PM
Jul 2012

Well. it's certainly done a number on me and... Oh no, hang on, I was stupid to begin with.

As you were...

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience»Hey, remember that recent...