What Can We Learn From The Retraction of the Mediterranean Diet Study? (vox.com)

Remember that landmark 2013 study that found that people on a Mediterranean diet had a 30% lower chance of heart attack, stroke, or death from cardiovascular disease than people on low-fat diets? An anonymous reader quotes Vox: Last June, the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine pulled the original paper from the record, issuing a rare retraction. It also republished a new version [of the PREDIMED study] based on a reanalysis of the data that accounted for the missteps... But after spending several days talking with some of the brightest minds in nutrition research and epidemiology, I now feel the PREDIMED retraction is actually cause for hope -- maybe even a new beginning for the field.

Yes, studies with big flaws pass peer review and make it into high-impact journals, but the record can eventually be corrected because of skeptical researchers questioning things. It's science working as it should, and the PREDIMED takedown is a wonderful example of that. This process should bring us a step closer to what really matters: informing people who want to know how to eat for a healthy life.

Comments

god bless the microbiome

[epine]

Use common sense when you choose things you put into your body.

Good lord, welcome to the middle ages.

Is it common sense that the fructose half of sucrose is metabolized in the liver by much the same pathway that processes ethanol (which if abused, in either case, contributes to fatty liver disease)?

No, it is not.

Is it common sense that the pancreas contains a melatonin receptor, so that your metabolic response to carbohydrates varies throughout the day?

Is it common sense that ulcers are mainly caused by Heliobacter pylori?

Is the effect of Toxoplasma gondii on motorcyclist and mouse behaviour common sense?

Is it common sense that fecal microbiota transplants would prove more effective in treating C. difficile than vancomycin?

Is it common sense that wholesome fresh fish potentially contains toxic levels of methyl mercury that bio-accumulate in adipose tissues?

Is it common sense that the high-productivity crops introduced during the agricultural revolution (not yet using GMO breeding techniques) remain as nutritious as the original heirloom crops?

(Besides, that was a trick question. There were three separate agricultural revolutions as human population exploded, so there are—logically—three entirely different tiers of heirloom throwbacks; the only reason this hasn't shown up at a Whole Foods near you is that Amazon's marketrons have yet to figure out how to make Silver Heirloom, Gold Heirloom, and Platinum Heirloom sound appetizing—though it does accurately reflect viable price points, given the associated yields.)

Diet is super important. We can't go around making naive assumptions. Neither can we trust failed epidemiology to untangle these incredibly complex signals. However, from the microbiome (and proteomics) much truth shall flow, even if it proves to be slow going.