# Totally OT: How to recognize junk science **URL:** \ **Category:** Macro Economic Trends and Risks\ **Created:** [June 12, 2023, 5:34pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451 "2023-06-12T17:34:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![WendyBG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/wendybg/32/67464_2.png) [@WendyBG](https://discussion.fool.com/u/WendyBG)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 5:34pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/1 "2023-06-12T17:34:47Z")
As a scientist, I love data. I get emotional satisfaction from knowing that something has been proven by a well-designed experiment, preferably repeated at several unrelated labs. I am really annoyed by junk science, especially when generated by parties with a vested interest in the results. Here’s a good example. Publicity article > **[Nut consumption is linked to better memory and brain blood flow](https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/could-eating-more-nuts-help-boost-memory-later-in-life?utm_source=Sailthru%20Email&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=MNT%20Daily%20News&utm_content=2023-06-12&apid=32460403&rvid=e3b0c44298fc1c149afbf4c8996fb92427ae41e4649b934ca495991b7852b855)** > > A recent study suggests that people who consume more nuts later in life may improve their memory and brain health. # Could eating more nuts help boost memory later in life? Research article [https://www.clinicalnutritionjournal.com/article/S0261-5614(23)00167-X/fulltext](https://www.clinicalnutritionjournal.com/article/S0261-5614(23)00167-X/fulltext) # Longer-term mixed nut consumption improves brain vascular function and memory: A randomized, controlled crossover trial in older adults How we know this is junk science: 1. It was funded by the International Nuts and Dried Fruit Council (INC). Not surprisingly, nuts were found to be good for you! 2. The number of participants (28) was less than the barest minimum usually considered necessary for statistical analysis (30). 3. The study time was short (a 16-week intervention) which is far too short a time to determine whether a lasting effect resulted. 4. Although they controlled the study by using each participant as their own control (a period without nuts and a period with nuts) they didn’t control for significant factors, such as race and income. 5. The variability in the effects were larger than the mean effect. C’mon, what’s the use of a statistic like “treatment effect: 5.0 ± 6.5 mL/100 g/min”? I would be embarrased to publish something like that. If it was “treatment effect: 5.0 ± 0.1 mL/100 g/min” I would believe that the treatment effect of 5 was real instead of a calculated mean of a bunch of random dots. 6. The main point – that memory was improved – was a very small effect (16%) that could easily have been an artifact of the test. When I see data, I want large data sets (at least hundreds of people, millions is better but usually only available from national health care databases such as the VA in the U.S. or countries in Europe), long periods of followup and clear, highly significant results. Data for evidence-based medicine is collected here: [https://thennt.com/](https://thennt.com/) Non-U.S. data can be found in the National Library of Medicine: [Advanced Search Results - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/advanced/) I happen to like nuts and will continue to eat them (in small portions because they are high in calories). But I don’t think they will improve my memory. Wendy ---
**Author:** ![XMFRob](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/xmfrob/32/14080_2.png) [@XMFRob](https://discussion.fool.com/u/XMFRob)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 5:45pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/2 "2023-06-12T17:45:24Z")
> [@WendyBG](#): > > I happen to like nuts and will continue to eat them (in small portions because they are high in calories). But I don’t think they will improve my memory. Maybe they are… but you still can’t remember… 😉 Keep eating! Rob He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose. ---
**Author:** ![steve203](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/steve203/32/3302_2.png) [@steve203](https://discussion.fool.com/u/steve203)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 6:00pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/3 "2023-06-12T18:00:02Z")
The media lives to promote hype and hysteria. Nonsense like this “study” is constantly being trotted out to urge you to drink more coffee, eat more chocolate, whatever the sponsor wanted the “study” to endorse. Of course, some of the studies are sponsored by “TPTB” urging everyone to be in a hetero marriage, have children, buy a house, and go to church. Of course, these “studies” have to compete with the latest “severe weather” and “breaking news” hysteria, along with touting the latest activity by British royals and “celebs”. Steve…after last week, I am entirely done with hearing about Taylor Swift ---
**Author:** ![ptheland](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/ptheland/32/3459_2.png) [@ptheland](https://discussion.fool.com/u/ptheland)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 6:42pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/4 "2023-06-12T18:42:22Z")
As a non-scientist - or perhaps an amateur scientist who appreciates professional scientists - I have some very simple screening rules for articles about science. Is it written or promoted by a politician? If so, probably junk science. Is the research paid for by someone who will profit financially from the results? If so, probably junk science. Is it published in a respected, peer reviewed, scientific journal? If so, probably good science. Is it written by a scientist operating out of their lane? If so, it can’t be relied upon. Its in that gray area in the middle of junk science and good science. Which makes it’s pretty darn useless. Is it written by a scientist operating in their area of expertise, but goes against pretty much every other scientist in the field, and virtually none of those are changing their minds? It’s probably junk science. –Peter ---
**Author:** ![WendyBG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/wendybg/32/67464_2.png) [@WendyBG](https://discussion.fool.com/u/WendyBG)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 6:59pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/5 "2023-06-12T18:59:25Z")
> [@ptheland](#): > > Is it written by a scientist operating in their area of expertise, but goes against pretty much every other scientist in the field, and virtually none of those are changing their minds? It’s probably junk science. That’s usually true…but occasionally it’s a paradigm-shifting gem of brilliance that may take decades, or even centuries, to be recognized and accepted. > **[Ignaz Semmelweis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis)** > > Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (.mw-parser-output .IPA-label-small{font-size:85%}.mw-parser-output .references .IPA-label-small,.mw-parser-output .infobox .IPA-label-small,.mw-parser-output .navbox .IPA-label-small{font-size:100%}German: \[ˈɪɡnaːts ˈzɛml̩vaɪs\]; Hungarian: Semmelweis Ignác Fülöp \[ˈsɛmmɛlvɛjs ˈiɡnaːts ˈfyløp\]; 1 July 1818 – 13 August 1865) was a Hungarian physician and scientist of German descent, who was an early pioneer of antiseptic procedures, and was described as the "saviour of mo... > **[Barbara McClintock](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_McClintock)** > > Barbara McClintock (June 16, 1902 – September 2, 1992) was an American scientist and cytogeneticist who was awarded the 1983 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. McClintock received her PhD in botany from Cornell University in 1927. There she started her career as the leader of the development of maize cytogenetics, the focus of her research for the rest of her life. From the late 1920s, McClintock studied chromosomes and how they change during reproduction in maize. She developed the techn... > **[Gregor Mendel](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel)** > > Gregor Johann Mendel OSA (/ˈmɛndəl/; Czech: Řehoř Jan Mendel; 20 July 1822 – 6 January 1884) was a German-Czech biologist, meteorologist, mathematician, Augustinian friar and abbot of St. Thomas' Abbey in Brno (Brünn), Margraviate of Moravia. Mendel was born in a German-speaking family in the Silesian part of the Austrian Empire (today's Czech Republic) and gained posthumous recognition as the founder of the modern science of genetics. Though farmers had known for millennia that cross Mendel w... > **[Charles Darwin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin)** > > Charles Robert Darwin FRS FRGS FLS FZS JP (/ˈdɑːrwɪn/ DAR-win; 12 February 1809 – 19 April 1882) was an English naturalist, geologist and biologist, widely known for his contributions to evolutionary biology. His proposition that all species of life have descended from a common ancestor is now generally accepted and considered a fundamental concept in science. In a joint publication with Alfred Russel Wallace, he introduced his scientific theory that this branching pattern of evolutio Darwin... > **[A Brief History of Vaccination](https://www.who.int/news-room/spotlight/history-of-vaccination/a-brief-history-of-vaccination)** > > For centuries, humans have looked for ways to protect each other against deadly diseases. From experiments and taking chances to a global vaccine roll-out in the midst of an unprecedented pandemic, immunization has a long history. Wendy ---
**Author:** ![btresist](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/btresist/32/1678_2.png) [@btresist](https://discussion.fool.com/u/btresist)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 7:14pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/6 "2023-06-12T19:14:25Z")
> [@WendyBG](#): > > I happen to like nuts and will continue to eat them (in small portions because they are high in calories). But I don’t think they will improve my memory. Might be worth another look. The lead author in this study is from Harvard. > **[Long-term intake of nuts in relation to cognitive function in older women -...](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-014-0014-6)** > > Objective Nuts contain nutrients that may benefit brain health; thus, we examined long-term intake of nuts in relation to cognition in older women. Design Population-based prospective cohort study. Setting Academic research using data from the... Another study using a Chinese data set found “Nut consumption was inversely associated with cognition decline.” [A Prospective Association of Nut Consumption with Cognitive Function in Chinese Adults Aged 55+ \_ China Health and Nutrition Survey | The journal of nutrition, health & aging](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12603-018-1122-5#Abs1) Nuts have a high concentration of flavonoids. Flavonoids apparently can accumulate in parts of the brain associated with learning and memory, providing a possible mechanism for how nuts can impact memory. This study reports than nuts can alter one’s EEG patterns. [https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1096/fasebj.31.1\_supplement.636.24](https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.636.24) Long a nut supporter (please, no jock jokes). ---
**Author:** ![ptheland](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/ptheland/32/3459_2.png) [@ptheland](https://discussion.fool.com/u/ptheland)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 8:04pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/7 "2023-06-12T20:04:58Z")
> [@WendyBG](#): > > That’s usually true…but occasionally it’s a paradigm-shifting gem of brilliance that may take decades, or even centuries, to be recognized and accepted. Hence my “probably”. Because most of the time in the modern world, it IS junk science, and probably should be caught by one of the other filters, we just don’t have enough information available to use one of the other filters. –Peter ---
**Author:** ![WendyBG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/wendybg/32/67464_2.png) [@WendyBG](https://discussion.fool.com/u/WendyBG)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 8:20pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/8 "2023-06-12T20:20:38Z")
Nuts are expensive. They are a luxury. Poor people can’t afford to eat nuts daily. Rich people who can afford to eat nuts daily are more likely to have higher education and income. I read about the research that correlated nut consumption with cognitive function in older women. The first thing that occured to me was that income also correlates with cognitive function. Income is strongly correlated with education, which is one of the strongest correlates of cognitive function in old age. Unless a study factors out education and income – variables which are directly correlated with cognitive function as well as the ability to afford to eat expensive nuts daily – the correlation of nut consumption as a separate, independent variable affecting cognitive function will be confounded. Wendy ---
**Author:** ![steve203](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/steve203/32/3302_2.png) [@steve203](https://discussion.fool.com/u/steve203)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 9:46pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/9 "2023-06-12T21:46:00Z")
> [@btresist](#): > > Might be worth another look. The lead author in this study is from Harvard. Doesn’t mean a thing. There is a very well known “thought leader”, who holds degrees from both Yale and Harvard, and is several candlepower short of brilliant. Stee ---
**Author:** ![btresist](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/btresist/32/1678_2.png) [@btresist](https://discussion.fool.com/u/btresist)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2023, 10:16pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/10 "2023-06-12T22:16:07Z")
> [@WendyBG](#): > > Unless a study factors out education and income – variables which are directly correlated with cognitive function as well as the ability to afford to eat expensive nuts daily – the correlation of nut consumption as a separate, independent variable affecting cognitive function will be confounded. The Harvard study does take into account education as well as a number of other confounding factors. But look, there are very few conclusive human studies because doing proper controlled experiments on humans is very hard for ethical reasons. The best one can do is to make a judgement based on the best available data. I can find a lot of studies to support the view that nuts have a positive health benefit, including improving brain activity. Another example: [Beneficial Effects of Walnuts on Cognition and Brain Health - PMC](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7071526/) But that’s just my opinion, your mileage may vary. > [@steve203](#): > > Doesn’t mean a thing. There is a very well known “thought leader”, who holds degrees from both Yale and Harvard, and is several candlepower short of brilliant. Doesn’t mean a thing only if you are an absolutist where everything is black and white with no grays. I go with the percentages. From what I’ve seen, the research coming out of Harvard tends to be better than average. Certainly not always, but more often than not. So Harvard does mean something to me. I am far more likely to take medical advice from the Harvard Medical School than someone from youtube. You may disagree. ---
**Author:** ![physician](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/physician/32/63838_2.png) [@physician](https://discussion.fool.com/u/physician)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2023, 4:47pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/11 "2023-06-13T16:47:26Z")
[Acetyl-L-carnitine improves aged brain function - PubMed (nih.gov)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20590847/) I’ve been taking acetyl L carnitine 500 mg/day since the 90’s due to some early research on this nutraceutical. This is in response to the original post about mixed nuts and memory…doc [acetyl l carnitine studies at DuckDuckGo](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=acetyl+l+carnitine+studies&ia=web) ---
**Author:** ![MataroPete](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/mataropete/32/16060_2.png) [@MataroPete](https://discussion.fool.com/u/MataroPete)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2023, 4:54pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/12 "2023-06-13T16:54:23Z")
> [@physician](#): > > I’ve been taking acetyl L carnitine 500 mg/day since the 90’s Curious as to what dosage and why? Pete ---
**Author:** ![rainphakir](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/rainphakir/32/1497_2.png) [@rainphakir](https://discussion.fool.com/u/rainphakir)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2023, 5:41pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/13 "2023-06-13T17:41:19Z")
Do the hydrolyzed peptides powder/supplements provide L-carnitine, or the precursor building blocks? A Google wants to sell me supplements. So… Bing GPT tells me L-carnitine is - not a standalone molecule in hydrolyzed peptide powder; - an amino acid, synthesized in the body. - available in “meat”. Therefore I conclude that peptide powders might be metabolized, and L-carnitine released. 👽 ralph ---
**Author:** ![physician](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/physician/32/63838_2.png) [@physician](https://discussion.fool.com/u/physician)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2023, 7:53pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/14 "2023-06-13T19:53:50Z")
Pete, if I remember correctly the study cited the differences between old rats who got the supplement and compared to the old rats who got a placebo vs the controls that were young rats. The old rats that got ALCAR ran the mazes as fast as the young ones. The old rats that got placebo ran the mazes much slower. When they looked at the rat brains under the electron microscope, the rats that got ALCAR had brain cells that looked like the young rat brains vs the rats that got placebo had brains that were old with lots of aging issues. The article suggested a dose of 500 mg daily for maintaining the function of the brain components. It specifically mentioned that the mitochondria (engine of the brain cell) looked especially good in the ALCAR group…doc ---
**Author:** ![physician](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/physician/32/63838_2.png) [@physician](https://discussion.fool.com/u/physician)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2023, 7:58pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/totally-ot-how-to-recognize-junk-science/93451/15 "2023-06-13T19:58:17Z")
I actually stumbled across L carnitine information. L carnitine apparently doesn’t cross the blood brain barrier so would have no effects on the brain. Acetyl l carnitine does cross the BBB. Also, if anyone is interested carnitines may do something for testosterone as we age…doc [Carnitine versus androgen administration in the treatment of sexual dysfunction, depressed mood, and fatigue associated with male aging - PubMed (nih.gov)](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15072869/)