northernmusician's Journal, 08 January 2015

Thank for the article NM. Despite the generalizations I thought it did a good job of explaining the need for more protein when we're in a calorie deficit. 

just because they can't generalize it to EVERYONE doesn't mean they don't know anything. It doesn't matter how many experiments and studies you do you can never prove something so it always applies. Especially in this kind of science all they can do is tell you what they see, if there is a person whose body works differently but it's true for everyone else it means that you can't generalize properly, you never can. But than doesn't mean that the people writing these articles are just guessing at something they are just telling you what they know is true for most people (or what they observed happening to the people in the studies) with a few exceptions.  

I'm a chemist, and that's one big thing I've always had a problem with...one positive tests seems to outweigh the negative ones...those are the "breakthroughs"....oh well, agreed, experimentation with all of this is key! 

I agree with what everyone has said. Cookies, you're young so... lol. No I'm not going there. You're right of course, but you said something scientists rarely do, and that's to state that you can never really prove anything. It's simply our current level of understanding. I'm afraid in science today, it's just as dangerous to be right too early as it was in Galileo's time. (I'm a musician. I know this stuff. :D ) Soco. Have you ever read "Free Radicals" by Michael Brooks? From the book jacket: "Scientists have colluded in the most successful cover-up of modern times. They present themselves as cool, logical and level-headed, relying exclusively on facts and passionless interpretations of painstakingly researched results. But the truth is scientists will do anything - take drugs, follow mystical visions, lie, and even cheat - to make a discovery." It's not that I don't appreciate what science has done for us. It's just that science has become its own religion with dogma and ritual intact. I don't mind that it's that way, but I'd appreciate it if they were honest about it. Just tell a scientist that you heard an explosion in the corner of your livingroom and looked over to see a galaxy mobile had just appeared as if by magic. They'll look at you like you're nuts. As though 'The Little Bang' simply could not happen. 

I haven't but I read something similar in college, I can't remember the name now....but that's what science is based on, conjecture and hypotheses...and I'm a scientist lol....there is no certainty about most things so it's just a field of guessing and hoping you're right (I believe most breakthroughs can be dis-proven or at least modified with the changing times) 

I took a class in college where we read scientific papers and found the errors in them (basically because if any of us were to go on and be published we would know what to look for in our own works), it was amazing to me that 999 negative results could be negated by 1 positive (or however it worked out)....it was definitely an education... 

Aw, you've ruined it for yourself. The key to big break-throughs is to ignore what's been proven. In fact science, as in writing, it's all about 'what if'. Actually, isn't that the core of life itself? 

I suppose so ;) 

Unfortunately what can happen is evidence that doesn't fit the "accepted" theory in the scientific community can get ignored, sometimes those who pursue it are ostracized and marginalized. 

Very true, Jim! 

That's exactly what has happened with cholesterol. The Japanese did a huge study on the effects of cholesterol on heart attack and stroke and don't even test cholesterol since it has no bearing. The end result is no Staten drugs are prescribed there. In north America? They're the largest selling drug. The drug companies even include a disclaimer that low cholesterol has never been shown to reduce heart attack or stroke. 

Have you ever read "Grain Brain". Dr. Perlmutter is a renowned neurologist whose expertise includes gluten issues, brain health & nutrition, and preventing neurodegenerative disorders. 

Permutter agrees that we all are over medicated with medicines that are unnecessary - he agrees about the cholesterol drugs! 

The science has disproven the efficacy of cholesterol drugs, but how do you thwart a religious dogma, and the routine treatment that supports half of the drug industry? Doctors aren't scientists. They are advised. The medical system is less about 'do no harm' now than it is with 'cover your butt and don't ever, ever consider a treatment that may be outside the norm'. It makes sense. If you're doing the same thing as the rest of the herd, you're less likely to be singled out and sued. After all if everyone is doing it.... You wouldn't jump off a bridge if everyone else was doing it would you? On the other hand, you might push someone off it that was what everyone was doing. 

hmm i guess... but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't still consider the studies, in psychology all we had to do is find what was wrong with the studies and why they are invalid but at the end of the day they still had some truth in them and helped revolutionize child care and loads of other fields. and the sheepherding phenomenon you are talking about can be seen everywhere, it is such a big part of our society and is kind of sad to watch. For example Milgram was hated by the other psychologists of his time for his study because they didn't want to believe that authorities have such a huge influence on people, because then it was the norm to think that we are completely self controlled an uninfluenced band that ponly bad people can do bad things.  

Wow, I'd love to discuss those issues with you too, Cookies, but that would be on the 'politics. law, and actions' thread. I'll give you this. You seem to really know how to push my hot buttons. :D I appreciate your comment that the findings shouldn't be discarded, but sometimes they are, which they likely would have with Milgram if they could have. The scientific community often discards or suppresses findings or worse (thinking Galileo here) if it doesn't go along with the party line. I'm just saying when it comes to 'experts' - or politicians - telling us what to do, we still need to think for ourselves. I'll bet you'd agree with that. Happy you checked back in here. 

yeah I agree with you :) ( especially when it comes to politicians :D) I hate how peoples selfishness and their beliefs get in the way of finding out the truth and considering other peoples opinions and findings. I'm also happy I checked back in :3