Health NEWZZZZ

I understand where vegetarians are coming from, as far as not wanting to consume cute little animals.

But... it's just not healthy to eat a diet without meat.

Cremieux @cremieuxrecueil

To date, there's only been one large study of the effects of a vegetarian diet on the sex ratio of newborns, and it was consistent with vegetarian mothers suffering from malnutrition.

The paper found that vegetarian women gave birth to fewer boys than women with a normal non-vegan died did. The authors believe that this may be the result of more spontaneous abortions -- miscarriages -- affecting more male fetuses than female ones.

This is not a great advertisement for the nutritional bounty of a vegan diet.

The paper is linked in this tweet.

Scientific American: We reject scientific rigor in favor of Liberal Ways of Knowing.

Scientific American, which dates to 1845 and touts itself as "the oldest continuously published magazine in the United States," recently ran an article arguing that scientists should prioritize "reality" over scientific "rigor." What would make a publication with a name like this one set empirical evidence at odds with reality? Masks, of course.

Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard professor of the history of science, argued that by "prioritizing scientific rigor" in its mask studies, the Cochrane Library may have "misled the public," such that "the average person could be confused" about the efficacy of masks. Oreskes criticized Cochrane for its "standard . . . methodological procedures," as Cochrane bases its "findings on randomized controlled trials, often called the 'gold standard' of scientific evidence." Since RCTs haven't shown that masks work, she writes, "[i]t's time those standard procedures were changed."

City Journal contributing editor John Tierney called Cochrane "the world's largest and most respected organization for evaluating health interventions." A recent Cochrane review found that "[w]earing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness"--or "to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2"--"compared to not wearing masks." The review also found that "use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference" for the "outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza infection."

While Oreskes asserts that Cochrane's findings were made with "low to moderate" certainty, each of the findings quoted above was made with "moderate certainty," the second-highest of four certainty classifications. "Moderate certainty," Cochrane notes, means that "the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect." The Cochrane review's lead author, Oxford's Tom Jefferson, said of masks in a subsequent interview with Australian investigative journalist Maryanne Demasi, "There is just no evidence that they make any difference. Full stop."

In response, Oreskes claimed that "[t]he Cochrane finding was not that masking didn't work but that scientists lacked sufficient evidence of sufficient quality to conclude that they worked." She continues, "Jefferson erased that distinction, in effect arguing that because the authors couldn't prove that masks did work, one could say that they didn't work. That's just wrong." But Jefferson didn't simply say that masks don't work; he said there's "no evidence" they work. The burden of proof should be on the side of those advocating a medical intervention. Without remotely having met that burden, Oreskes asserts that masks do work. Cochrane, she writes, "gave the false impression that masking didn't help."

In fact, 16 RCTs have tested whether masks effectively reduce the spread of viruses. Not one has found compelling evidence that they do. Two have found statistically significant evidence that masks are counterproductive--that they increase the spread of viruses--probably because masks are frequently moist or dirty, and people often touch them.

...

Surgical masks were designed to protect patients from having open wounds infected by medical personnel, not to prevent the spread of viruses.

...

Oreskes argues that "Cochrane has made this mistake"--the mistake of basing its findings on medical evidence--"before." In 2011, a Cochrane review found little evidence that flossing prevents gum disease. Subsequently, the Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services struck flossing from their joint dietary guidelines. The Associated Press then reviewed 25 medical studies and came to the same conclusion as Cochrane. According to the New York Times, "the American Academy of Periodontology acknowledged that most of the current evidence fell short," in part because researchers hadn't been able to "examine gum health over a significant amount of time."

Oreskes cites the lack of strong medical evidence supporting flossing to suggest that if one believes in flossing, one must also believe in masks.

If you believe in one thing the science does not support, you must believe in all things that the science doesn't support.

Also, Cochrane actually found that flossing does work, when combined with toothbrushing.

...

In a way, Oreskes has provided a public service with her article, as has Scientific American in running it. The article makes clear how willing mask advocates are to sacrifice scientific objectivity on the altar of their newfound religion.

America saw its highest levels of suicide, ever, in 2022.

Let's Go Brandon!

The number of suicides in the United States has hit a record high, new provisional federal data shows.

In 2022, an estimated 49,449 people died by suicide, which is 3% higher than the 48,183 people who died in 2021, according to a report published early Wednesday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics.

The suicide rate increased by 1% in 2022 to 14.3 deaths per 100,000 from 14.1 per 100,000 in 2021, marking this as the highest rate seen since 1941, according to the report.

The authors said when the final data for 2022 is collected, they expect the number of suicides to likely be higher as additional death certificates with pending causes of death are ruled as deaths by suicide.

Adding to the nation's levels of depression and anxiety? Higher "education."

Used to be, college was the best time of someone's life.

Not any longer!

Depression and anxiety rates higher among college students than their peers, new study suggests

Experts discuss what can be done to 'remove barriers' and boost college students' mental health

By Melissa Rudy

College students may be at a greater risk of experiencing depression and anxiety compared to young people who are not in higher education, according to a new study published in The Lancet Public Health.

Researchers from University College London analyzed data from two studies.

...

Based on multiple surveys the young people completed about their mental health, there was a small, elevated risk for depression and anxiety among the students compared to the non-students. There was an approximate 6% difference in risk between the two groups.

A Millennial woman claims she's invented a new health practice: Walking in silence so that one can hear one's own thoughts.

What an innovation!

gotta get my core work in

Stronk!

So does anyone have any GAINZZZ? Or PLANZZZ to get some GAINZZZ?

This turtle has GAINZZZ, he's gettin' jacked, son!

Olive and Mabel get some GAINZZZ at the beach!

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 03:17 PM

| Access Comments