A Published Study Says It's So, Should I Listen? Maybe Not!

Episode Intro

0:18 - Craig - Should science be trusted or is it an agenda-driven narrative

1:08 - Holden - How he goes about getting a peer-reviewed study

3:29 - Craig - It only takes 8-9 subjects to get a peer-reviewed study — What!

4:22 - Holden - Not so fast…. 8 - 9 is The Human Performance area for statistical significance, but it doesn’t always mean it is a practical significance which is what we are challenging.

8:11 -  Holden - Example counting calories and looking at the thermic effect of metabolizing food.

9:48 - Holden - Effect size statistics - is it of practical and statical significance. Example - To wear a mask or not wear a mask.

12:39 - Holden explanation of the Effect Size Statistic and why this should be the ultimate reasoning we should consider when looking at a study

14:28 - Craig - How do they control these studies?

16:14 - Craig - Doesn’t genetics and other factors affect these outcomes.

17:47 - Adam - I never knew I had to question the headline, as I hear you say the data may be different than the significance.

20:17 - Holden - a popular study shows150 min of moderate exercise a week would reduce significantly your risk of a heart attack, stroke, developing diabetes - but the real data actually expose that only 1 out of 100 people will fall into this category… but yet the media and health associations push this agenda.

21:44 - Craig - peer reviewers and the media have their own agenda and change the narrative on these studies.

24:02 - Holden - The American Nutritional guidelines are political

27:38 - Holden - CDC - says 42% of Americans are obese today — Before the US Dietary Guidelines were changed this number was only 15-20%

31-21 - Adam - Has science and politics always been an issue?

Craig  Capurso's

https://www.craigcapurso.com/linktree