287
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] smooth_tea@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago
[-] ook_the_librarian@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I can't tell what this is supposed to convey. They asked for a study. You give a bare url to an abstract with the quote

there is no clear consensus on whether non-sugar sweeteners are effective for long-term weight loss or maintenance, or if they are linked to other long-term health effects at intakes within the ADI.

Are you agreeing with the post you are replying to?

[-] smooth_tea@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

They asked for a study. You give a bare url to an abstract with the quote

Perhaps you could download the entire meta study that is linked next to the abstract and go through it? And why does it matter whether I'm agreeing with the post?

From all the years of reading about artificial sugar studies, it's clear to me that there could be a risk but it is complex and varies from person to person, I find it misplaced to shout that there is absolutely no risk involved. To quote the study:

Result of this review largely agree with those of other recent systematic reviews, in that replacing sugars with NSS in the short term results in reductions in body weight, with little impact on other cardiometabolic risk factors, but is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and mortality in the longer term.

[-] ook_the_librarian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Perhaps you could download the entire meta study that is linked next to the abstract and go through it?

No, I am not refereeing a paper because some commenter links it in a web forum. Why would you think that's even close to what anyone should do in this environment?

[-] smooth_tea@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

So let me get this straight, someone asks for a study, I provide the study of studies, which you misjudge originally for being only an abstract, and then when I correct you and tell you it's a study, suddenly it's not good enough. What do you actually want?

[-] ook_the_librarian@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

What do you actually want?

I want conversation. Bare links are not that. Looking at the link led me to believe you providing evidence for the quack who was professing absolute safety.

Scientifically, I agree with you. I was asking the "absolute safety" commentor to provide context to studies to lead one to that conclusion. I would have been happy to read the same from you.

You have a lot to say for someone who is happy to slap a url down and move along. :)

this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023
287 points (89.5% liked)

News

23627 readers
2696 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS