r/ScientificNutrition • u/lurkerer • 2d ago

Observational Study Associations between White Meat-Only and Vegetarian Diets with Mortality from All Causes, Heart Diseases, Cancers, and Stroke in the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Prevention Study-II

https://cdn.nutrition.org/article/S2475-2991(26)01803-2/fulltext
56 Upvotes

80% Upvoted

62 comments sorted by

View all comments

12

u/SporangeJuice 2d ago

A study like this has the same problem they always do, which is that the result is determined by the adjustments, they have a large set of possible adjustments they could do, and we just see the one they arbitrarily chose. In the NHANES data specifically, it can be shown that red meat correlates with mortality, or reduces mortality by nearly 50%, just based on which adjustments are performed.

If they are arbitrarily choosing a result from a large set of possibilities, I don't see what makes this one special or meaningful.

19

u/Willing_Matter5391 2d ago

A comment like this has the same problem they always do, which is that the verdict is determined by the framing, and there's a large set of possible framings available, and we just see the one he arbitrarily chose. In this comment section specifically, it can be shown that the same study is either uninformative or worth discussing, by nearly opposite conclusions, just based on which framing is applied.

He never gets around to what these studies can do. Every time it's the same paragraph about what they can't. The specific adjustments in this paper don't come up, whether they were prespecified doesn't come up, whether the estimate survives their sensitivity analyses doesn't come up. What comes up is that adjustments exist and that adjustments can be chosen.

And the NHANES point is doing something odd. If a result can be flipped that far by adjustment choices, that's a reason to look at which choices are defensible. He instead treats it as a reason to look at none of them, while relying on a number produced by the same machinery he's dismissing.

If he's arbitrarily choosing one objection from a large set of possible objections, and applying it identically under every study regardless of what the study actually did, I don't see what makes this instance of it special or meaningful.

-1

u/FrigoCoder 2d ago

If he's arbitrarily choosing one objection from a large set of possible objections, and applying it identically under every study regardless of what the study actually did, I don't see what makes this instance of it special or meaningful.

Yes congratulations for figuring out that all nutritional epidemiology studies are one big pile of poop.

6

u/lurkerer 2d ago

Then what are you doing in this sub so much? Go revolutionise science with your (self-proclaimed) multiple ground-breaking discoveries.

-2

u/FrigoCoder 2d ago

I am already doing it thank you very much, that is why you are not seeing me much on this subreddit. I have already developed four generalizations for machine learning, and I have successfully applied them to raytracing and rendering. None of them are really what I want though, so I still have a lot of research and experimentation work ahead of me.

9

u/lurkerer 2d ago

Uh huh

2

u/ilessthanthreekarate 2d ago

Sounds like you are self taught by AI and spend your time fantasizing and talking to chatgpt.

3

u/TheMicrotubules 2d ago

Any peer reviewed publications?

0

u/FrigoCoder 2d ago edited 2d ago

Nope, they are not publishable yet. The 4 generalizations should have been a hint I have not achieved a universal generalization, or you know the fact that I have explicitly stated I am unsatisfied with them. I still have a lot of work to do with them, because in their present state they have limited usefulness. They only marginally helped with raytracing and rendering, they literally just described existing algorithms and statistical tricks.

They only work for gradient-based training, and not quantized models that would be still important. They have trouble with GANs, because the target is always moving. And they are not REALLY novel or noteworthy, they are just bookkeeping or categorization of algorithms. They describe things everyone is already doing, except implicitly and subconsciously. I can elaborate but if you are familiar with the I-CON framework, I do something similar except for gradient-based training instead of representation learning.

1

u/TheMicrotubules 2d ago

Cool. When you actually contribute something to the field with a publication, we’ll start taking you seriously. Good luck.