[–] Raylan 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago
It's one of the reasons why nutrition science is such a mess: you can't get reliable data from food journals and questionnaires. People lie, all the fucking time (well, except the fit one, because they don't need too, but it's not like they're enough of us to tip the scales).
[–] UnionJacqueline 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
This right here. I immediately disregard any diet-related study if the study relies on fatties to keep an accurate food and activity journal. It's been shown time and time again that fatties lie about how much they eat (they grossly underestimate caloric intake) and how active they are (they overestimate activity).
And on top of that food composition databases are far from perfect. It's really hard to accurately assess what's actually in the food, what gets absorbed and what gets, well, shat out. It's not like we have some fancy sci-fi tool that scans the food (or the crap) and tells us its precise composition. That's not a real problem for general weight loss or to get them gainz, because then a little guess work is fine, but it is a problem when you want to test scientific hypotheses. Questionnaires and food databases suck; we need a fucking tricorder.
[–] RuckedUp 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
I just have to look around the sprawling burbs I live in on a perfect sunny day of 71.2 degrees aaaand yup not a fucking soul outside, so any study I see that mentions Muricans exercising must be talking about the majority of them using the activity of rolling off the couch and waddling to the fridge for a beetus refill as cardio.
[–] johnsonk1222 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
No surprise there