The Science of Body Metamorphosis
- About Us
- Articles
- Can Calcium and Vitamin D Help Reduce Fat Gain?
- Coaching Clients With Obesity Course
- Do Dietitians Accurately Report Their Food Intake?
- Eat Slow, Eat Less
- Fat Loss
- FREE Research Reviews!
- General Guidelines for Training Programs
- Get Access to the Weightology Archives!
- How Successful Are U.S. Citizens at Maintaining Long-Term Weight Loss?
- Increasing Protein, or Decreasing Carbohydrate…Which Gives You a Metabolic Advantage?
- Insulin, an Undeserved Bad Reputation: The Biggest Insulin Myth, Continued…
- Insulin, An Undeserved Bad Reputation: The Finale
- Insulin…an Undeserved Bad Reputation
- Insulin…Still an Undeserved Bad Reputation After 10 Years
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 2
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 3…MOOOOO!!!!
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 4: The Biggest Insulin Myth of Them All
- Insulin: An Undeserved Bad Reputation, Part 5: Addressing the Critics
- Is High Fructose Corn Syrup Worse Than Regular Sugar?
- Jello to Rid the Jiggles? The Effects of Gelatin on Weight Maintenance
- Latest Content
- Miscellaneous Articles
- Muscle Gain
- Omron Exam: How Accurate Are These Pedometers?
- Online Coaching
- Physical Activity and Weight Regain
- Podcast Appearances
- Protein Before Or After Your Workout?
- Shop
- Sitting Too Much May Be Hazardous to Your Health
- Snooze to Lose
- Speed Eating: Do You Feel Less Full?
- Test Menu
- Testing the Phillips DirectLife Accelerometer
- Thank you!
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, Part 3: Bod Pod
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, Part 5: Skinfolds
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, Part 6: Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry (DEXA)
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”, The Final Chapter
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”: Part 1
- The Pitfalls of Body Fat “Measurement”: Part 2
- The Pitfalls of Bodyfat “Measurement”, Part 4: Bioelectrical Impedance (BIA)
- The Use of Weighted Apparel During Contest Prep: The Science and Practical Application
- The Weightology Archives
- Thinking Better, Part 1: The False Dichotomy
- Thinking Better, Part 2: Confirmation Bias
- Thinking Better, Part 3: Non Causa Pro Causa
- Thinking Better, Part 4: The Straw Man
- Thinking Better, Part 5: The Ad Hominem
- Weightology Archives Terms & Conditions
- Weightology LLC Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy
- What’s In the Weightology Research Review?
- Why Is It So Easy To Regain Weight?
- Speaking
- Testimonials
- Contact
- How Much Do Variations in Physiological Testosterone Matter To Your Gains?
- Periodization / Variation in Repetition Ranges for Muscle Size: Your Complete Evidence Based Guide
- Set Volume for Muscle Size: The Ultimate Evidence Based Bible
- Training Frequency for Hypertrophy: The Evidence-Based Bible
- Post-Exercise Energy Expenditure, Part 4: The Effect of Low Volume Weight Training
- Post-Exercise Energy Expenditure, Part 6: The Effect of Weight Training Volume
- Research Review: How Much Does Weight Training Help With Fat Loss?
- Research Review: Intermittent vs. Continuous Calorie Restriction for Fat Loss
- Why Do Meal Replacements Work?
So are you going to complete this mea culpe and submit a new re-analysis to the literature…or better yet…the same journal? I would argue that a blog post somewhere is meaningless to scientists who are going to read your article in the literature. There is no link from the lit to this.
Ackers, resubmitting a new analysis would be pointless as it still would suffer from the same shortcomings. The bottom line is that a meta-analysis doesn’t work for answering the question of a metabolic advantage. Controlled studies do that, and controlled studies take precendence over meta-analyses. The fact is, results of recent controlled studies differ from my analysis and thus the results of controlled studies take precedence.
I could submit a letter to the journal, but journals don’t publish letters on 6-year old articles.
I would also add that it’s not unusual for researchers to change their minds when better data emerges. A perfect example is when large-scale, randomized controlled trials come out, like on vitamin E supplementation. These studies, which showed no benefit to supplementation, trumped previous epidemiological evidence that suggested there was a benefit to vitamin E supplementation. That doesn’t mean that the researchers go back and retract the previous epidemiological studies…it’s just that the researchers recognize the weaknesses of the previous data and change their minds based on the new data.
Wow James. A lot of guts and humility from you to come out like this. I really wish that all science was as honest as can be no matter the thesis. I’m no low carb fan myself, but I feel very humbled by this read regardless. Thank you.
Thank you Lloyd!
Hey Carb Sane – I found the “Textbook of Biochemistry: Fourth Edition” by West / Todd / Mason / Van Bruggen published in 1966 at a flea market yesterday. I had to have it because I thought it would be a whoot to read too! A cursory glance shows that it includes a lot of theorizing as well as history of biochemistry. Now I just need to find some time!
James, this is the crux of my issue with not only LC “gurus”, but the mainstream as well. I remember in biology in college my text books were full of theories. Sometimes there were 3 or 4 competing theories discussed because we just didn’t know. I still have my bio texts from the 80’s here somewhere — it would probably be a whoot to read through them now sometime 😀 We are not always correct all of the time, and our beliefs change. Take politicians. One that doggedly sticks to some ideal even when the premise has been demonstrated wrong… Read more »