Seattle Forrest

https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/15/1/214

canklecat

I saw a pop-health, alt-medicine link to that story this week, but didn't read the actual referenced study. But I just glanced at the introduction to the published study. It's too limited to be applicable globally. And I'm skeptical about the self reporting methodology.

Not to defend sugary drinks or excessive intake of sugar, but...

I've become skeptical of most "studies" about nutrition until they've been peer reviewed and replicated by other research. Too many so-called scientific studies on nutrition were heavily biased from the start -- usually commissioned by food, booze, drug and vice lobbyists -- accepted and regurgitated as fact for years before credible research debunked the earlier claims.

No doubt excessive sugar is linked to diabetes and related diseases, and obesity. But hair loss? I'll need to see some independent confirmation. Which probably won't come for several more years.

A year or so ago there was also speculation among researchers that a sugary diet may have been a risk factor in COVID outcomes. I don't know whether there's been any followup or confirmation. I do recall noticing that among the people in their 30s-40s who died from COVID, most appeared to be overweight or obese. But it would be interesting to see some credible studies. That will take time and funding. We dropped the ball on that back in 2004 after the first SARS pandemic.

At this point some of these claims sound like the "research" that linked cyclists wearing helmets or athletes taking acetaminophen to "higher risk taking behaviors." Reeeaaallllyyy? Let's see a thorough review of the studies and independent replication to determine whether they were biased, or whether they excluded potentially relevant psychological and behavioral factors that had nothing to do with helmets and analgesics. Let's see data about the sampling groups to sort out the serious pro and amateur athletes from the recreational and fitness types, which is another factor in mindset and behaviors.

Polaris OBark

I kind of got tricked into publishing in an mdpi journal once, but in general I would be suspicious of anything they publish.

MoAlpha

Interesting and, I guess, plausible, even if sugar is a surrogate for some other associated factor. I didn’t understand all of the statistics, but the analysis seems pretty sophisticated and the sample is fairly large.

Agree, not great, but I think the journals vary somewhat in quality and selectivity. At least the Ed Board of that journal seems to have legit experts on it. I think my name got on an MDPI paper or two over the years too, but I seem to be an unpaid content producer, editor, and promoter exclusively for the big “E” these days, and they have their issues too.

Carbonfiberboy 

JAMA had a meta-study reviewing published nutritional studies, I don't remember exactly, maybe a year or two ago? They found that 83% had researcher bias. I think that explains a lot of the changes in nutrition advice over the years. I should have bookmarked it. But yeah, eat a med diet and don't use sugary drinks - except on the bike!

And it's China, right? While I don't think MPHL I applaud the political goal to get kids to drink fewer SSBs. After all, and You go, guys.
​​​​​​​

MinnMan

Agreed. They invite me to contribute papers/edit special volumes on a regular basis. Those in the business understand their role in the scientific publishing ecosystem, but others may not.

MinnMan

Oh yeah, the big "E". We all hate them, but in truth I send most of my papers to them.

Polaris OBark

What is "The Big E"? Elsiver?

MPDI sent me a swiss army knife, which I guess is nice but kind of weird.

MinnMan

yup

ZHVelo

Yes, too much sugar is bad for you. The issue is what is too much. Do I consume too much sugar if I intake multiple 100gs in one day? Yes if I sit all day, but also yes if I exercise and burn them off straight away?
I have no doubt that too much sugar could be a cause for hair loss, because it could even be indirectly, by making you obese and generally less healthy which may impact your hair. Who knows. I can believe it. But so what? We already know too much of (most, or all) things are bad.

MoAlpha

I'd probably have to send that back.

Elsevier subsidizes an annual international conference for a competitor journal to one I'm an associate editor for, and flies all my frenemies on their ed board to it business class! I have tried gently boycotting the meeting as a racketeer influenced and corrupt organization (aka pure jealousy), but postdocs gotta postdoc.

MinnMan

I spent a brief period of time on the editorial board of an Elsevier journal. I took part in two annual meetings, both in London. I recall the first one, when our handler asked our restaurant preferences, the more experienced members of the board said that the requirement was that the establishment have a Michelin star!

MoAlpha

I'm a section editor on two right now and put a hell of a lot of time into them. I get a plane ticket, a hotel room, and couple of dinners a year from a clinical society attached to one of them, but that's part of an actual working meeting. As far as I know, neither board gets anything.

Polaris OBark

I just stuck it in a desk drawer. The corkscrew is useful should I ever need to pick my nose.

Polaris OBark

That's better than the NIH. They aren't allowed to feed you.

MinnMan

The financial arrangements at Elsevier journals vary a great deal from one journal to another. The journal I was associated with paid editors $150 for each paper they handled, whether the paper went through the whole process or was rejected without review (which was about 2/3 of the submissions at the time - it is a pretty selective journal). Editors handled between 100 and 300 papers/year. This was 10 years ago.

MoAlpha

You don't have to tell me! I have worked in an NIH intramural program for 33 years.

MoAlpha

Wow, I've never heard of that, but it would be fantastic! Where did the funds come from?

Of course, I'd have to do it on my own time and my own computer and my ethics folks would never let me take it anyway.

For one of my "clients" I trash at least 2/3 without review. The other one, I send nearly everything out and it all seems to get accepted.

MinnMan

The money comes from Elsevier. With their giant profit margins, they can afford it. Or, really, it comes from taxpayers, who fund institutional libraries (universities, research orgs) which pay Elsevier's exorbitant subscription fees. I suppose some portion of their subscriptions come from R&D departments in industry, but the lion's share comes from academic institutions. And even in private universitie, the library costs are being supported by grant overhead.

University profs can accept consulting and other outside income, so long as they report it to their institution and their total external effort doesn't exceed some percentage. Yeah, federal civil servants are in a different position.

rumrunn6

got as far as this & said to myself "nope" not reading any more

excerpt" "epidemiological studies on the association between SSB intake and MPHL are still insufficient, especially among the young population. With limited data, a cross-sectional study indicated that sugary beverage intake is a protective factor for MPHL [9], which is inconsistent with the results of biological mechanism studies. Therefore, the association between SSB intake and MPHL needs to be confirmed by additional studies"

personally, I've been using finasteride & minoxidil for about 8-9 years with success