I'm talking about OleDoc having arrived at conclusions about the authors' experiments based on having read a summary--the abstract--that does not contain the information he needs for drawing those conclusions.Indeed it doesn't......and had the science writers who've been touting this current research also taken the trouble to read beyond the abstract (actually read beyond the authors and Yale's ad. copy, come to that.....The brain scans showed that drinking glucose "turns off or suppresses the activity of areas of the brain that are critical for reward and desire for food," said one study leader, Dr. Robert Sherwin, chief of endocrinology at Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Conn.With fructose, "we don't see those changes," he said. "As a result, the desire to eat continues -- it isn't turned off." ) ....there'd be no discussion on Science By Press release in this instance, would there??No one would have good cause for inferring that this small experiment meant anything beyond the stated objectives......no mention of causes for obesity, no mention of HFCS, cheapness of fructose vs, glucose etc. etc ......which is exactly my point.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar