l benefits as an exercise supplement
Verfasst: 15. Mai 2018, 04:43Last week I took on a media article that equated a glass of wine with an hour at the gym in terms of heath benefits. That article was a case of mangled reporting of scientific research (the lead author even addressed it). This week I’ve seen a number of media articles come out about another study, this time addressing the benefits of light, moderate, and strenuous running. As an example, the BBC published a story with the headline: “Too much jogging ‘as bad as no exercise at all.” And the Daily Mail writes: “Stop that binge jogging! Three times a week is best for you… and too much is as bad as doing nothing.”
I hope to get ahold of the text of this study, and had planned on writing about it myself as there are some clear issues with the interpretation of the results. However, Alex Hutchinson has already done the job and I thought I’d refer you to his take-down for an interesting and thoughtful read.ournalists and scientists have an obligation to fairly and accurately report the results of individual studies, and they have the further obligation to place those results in the context of what is already known in the field. By reporting the results of this one quite limited study with little or no critical perspective of its details or the larger context of the research, they have once again helped perpetuate the scientific illiteracy and innumeracy that is fast becoming one of the hallmarks of our time.I’ve yet to read the actual study referenced in the article, but assuming Hutchison is right about the shaky inferences the researchers made based on their data, I have to wonder how the article made it past the editors of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. Were they just not paying attention to the math?
All that said, I know that a couple of reputable studies from a few years ago did draw a statistical link between (clinically asymptomatic) myocardial fibrosis and repeated training for “extreme” endurance sports, so there is probably such a thing as “too much running” for one’s health. I just don’t think the Journal of the American College of Cardiology article proves it.Last Friday I wrote a post criticizing an article in My Daily that horrifically misinterpreted a research study on the compound resveratrol and its potential benefits as an exercise supplement. The article equated a glass of red wine to an hour at the gym in terms of health benefits. Unfortunately, there were numerous problems with this conclusion, several of which I outlined in my post.
Apparently the article has been spread around quite widely (sadly, the headline accomplished its goal), and this prompted the CBC to contact the lead author of the research study, Jason Dyck. I thought I’d share a link to the interview they conducted with him as it provides some interesting perspective, particularly about how a scientist feels about media misinterpretation/mangling of his hard work. On this topic he says:
“A lot of times when you work away in your lab you hope that people read your studies and that it makes an impact,” said Dyck.
“When you see all your hard work distilled down to one phrase that isn’t correct it’s a little disheartening.”
I hope to get ahold of the text of this study, and had planned on writing about it myself as there are some clear issues with the interpretation of the results. However, Alex Hutchinson has already done the job and I thought I’d refer you to his take-down for an interesting and thoughtful read.ournalists and scientists have an obligation to fairly and accurately report the results of individual studies, and they have the further obligation to place those results in the context of what is already known in the field. By reporting the results of this one quite limited study with little or no critical perspective of its details or the larger context of the research, they have once again helped perpetuate the scientific illiteracy and innumeracy that is fast becoming one of the hallmarks of our time.I’ve yet to read the actual study referenced in the article, but assuming Hutchison is right about the shaky inferences the researchers made based on their data, I have to wonder how the article made it past the editors of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology. Were they just not paying attention to the math?
All that said, I know that a couple of reputable studies from a few years ago did draw a statistical link between (clinically asymptomatic) myocardial fibrosis and repeated training for “extreme” endurance sports, so there is probably such a thing as “too much running” for one’s health. I just don’t think the Journal of the American College of Cardiology article proves it.Last Friday I wrote a post criticizing an article in My Daily that horrifically misinterpreted a research study on the compound resveratrol and its potential benefits as an exercise supplement. The article equated a glass of red wine to an hour at the gym in terms of health benefits. Unfortunately, there were numerous problems with this conclusion, several of which I outlined in my post.
Apparently the article has been spread around quite widely (sadly, the headline accomplished its goal), and this prompted the CBC to contact the lead author of the research study, Jason Dyck. I thought I’d share a link to the interview they conducted with him as it provides some interesting perspective, particularly about how a scientist feels about media misinterpretation/mangling of his hard work. On this topic he says:
“A lot of times when you work away in your lab you hope that people read your studies and that it makes an impact,” said Dyck.
“When you see all your hard work distilled down to one phrase that isn’t correct it’s a little disheartening.”