The NYT is so pathetic when it comes to reporting on health issues that it should be banned from doing so from this point forward.
The "study" the story is built around was an epidemiological study, so it's based on correlations and data-mining, which anyone knows can be outcome-controlled simply by changing the end points.
The Times devotes one paragraph to this:
A small double-blind randomized study conducted at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center found that non-lactating women lost more body fat than lactating women at six months, and at a faster rate.
A double-blind randomized study is going to be far more accurate than data mining. Perhaps the danish people who tend to breast feed also tend to have more resilient metabolisms, or have different gut bacteria (which is usually genetic with geographic influences). But for the Times, all that really matters is press-release reporting and propagating nutrition myths. #health
Nothing beats strolling down 7th Ave to the flea market, the smell of leaves in the cool autumn air, while the tiny fingers of Hunter and Tyler and Bradley crunch-crunch underfoot. #parenting
@A Message To Rudy: (Not to overlook the humor in your comment but) that chocolate milk study was probably paid for by the milk industry.
Also, btw, skim milk is not healthier than regular milk, so in theory, cocoa flavored regular milk would also reduce inflammation. But we can't risk allowing people to think that consuming *any* fat is okay, can we now? Nooooo. #health
Hmmm...sounds gimmicky. Not until I see a cardboard cut-out of a breast-feeding mommy between Jillian Michaels' display and Kim Kardashian's display at GNC, will I believe this. Besides, does the weight loss come with only human babies? I mean, imagine the weight one could lose breast-feeding a litter of puppies. #health
I can see a new classifieds section going up on Craigslist for men willing to suckle lactating mums. But wait........it says small humans. Damn you! Men from NJ... #health
11/12/09
Before you dismiss this, look at the evidence. #health
11/12/09
11/12/09
"Whoa! I was talking to your mom!" #parenting
11/12/09
The "study" the story is built around was an epidemiological study, so it's based on correlations and data-mining, which anyone knows can be outcome-controlled simply by changing the end points.
The Times devotes one paragraph to this:
A small double-blind randomized study conducted at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center found that non-lactating women lost more body fat than lactating women at six months, and at a faster rate.
A double-blind randomized study is going to be far more accurate than data mining. Perhaps the danish people who tend to breast feed also tend to have more resilient metabolisms, or have different gut bacteria (which is usually genetic with geographic influences). But for the Times, all that really matters is press-release reporting and propagating nutrition myths. #health
11/12/09
Look Ma! No hands! #parenting
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
*Survivor Type, Stephen King, 1985 #parenting
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09
Thanks, and can I get fries with that? #health
11/12/09
[www.nytimes.com] #health
11/12/09
Also, btw, skim milk is not healthier than regular milk, so in theory, cocoa flavored regular milk would also reduce inflammation. But we can't risk allowing people to think that consuming *any* fat is okay, can we now? Nooooo. #health
11/12/09
11/12/09
11/12/09