this post was submitted on 12 Oct 2025
108 points (100.0% liked)
Science
14508 readers
18 users here now
Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So ... what we've learned is that people with the same genetics will develop differently given different environments? Not exactly stop-the-presses news.
Yes. The issue is the accepted belief (among professionals) that "IQ doesn't change through life"... which is nice as a goal to develop a less biased "ideal IQ test", but also a really bad preconception when evaluating actual IQ test results.
There are many preconceptions like that in psychology, they need a periodic kick in the butt from actual data.
I mean, in the past eight years, I've noticed my mental acuity sharply falling off. I'd imagine some hope for the future might turn that around, but I've been burned enough times that the high point of my day is usually hearing from the ex-wife I tried to kill myself because of twice.
To the point where genetics is a rounding error is big news.
Yeah I hate when there are funded studies to tell us the obvious. NewsFlash: Eating double the recommended calories make people gain weight.
That's the whole premise of science though. To corroborate what we think is true with data. And more often than not it will turn out it wasn't even true in the first place.
Your example is actually a perfect example of that, because no, more calories doesn't make a person gain more weight necessarily. This was thought to be true in the fifties, but then scientists checked again. And today we* know that it is much more complex how the body handles calories and when it gains more weight.
* well scientists know. The public knowledge hasn't been updated since the fifties really...
Yeah, I know the details. I was being generalistic.
When I did power lifting I was probably eating 4000 calories a day and losing fat.
If I ate 4000 a day now though I would balloon up and be obese in no time.
The problem with the science world is they get paid for publishing, so sometimes nonsense studies are done.
By no means am I discounting science method.
But when I read full studies sometimes there are major flaws in the reasoning logic and it makes me irritated.
That's still wrong though and just because people get paid money for trying to gather data doesn't make it less valuable. Sure, the publishing system is utter bullshit, but the underlying scientific method applied is the same. So it doesn't really matter for the example at hand. So your previous comment has a major reasoning flaw as well...
Oh and btw the amount of recommended calories one should take in per day is total bullshit as well...
Portion of those studies disprove the obvious, which is why they keep trying.