Aantares    Aantares BB  Hop To Forum Categories  Your News, Money, Sports  Hop To Forums  News    Study: Junk food sold in middle schools doesn't cause obesity
      Page: 1 2 
Go To
Post
Search BB
Notify Me
TOS/Tools/Smilies
Reply
  
Study: Junk food sold in middle schools doesn't cause obesity
 Login/Register 
Devoted...
Picture of UgaBuga
Posted Hide Post
quote:
the kids intensely dislike the vending machine supplier and the prices charged so much that they boycott even though they crave the food inside.

That's probably it. A good analogy is that most alcoholics don't regularly get drunk in bars because it looks bad to toss fifteen shots in an hour and is far too expensive, so they grab a bottle or two at the off-sale and drown themselves at home. Kids addicted to junk food likely think the same way: boycott the vending machine and pick up a huge bag on the way to school/home for the same price. As compguy suggests, there don't seem to be any studies on overall junk food consumption from myriad sources, but I suspect that the more junk food a kid eats the fatter they are likely to be.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I know the rent is in arrears. The dog has not been fed in years. It's even worse than it appears...but it's alright. We will get by.
 
Posts: 5553 | Location: other | Mbr Since: 11-21-2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Forum Host
Picture of CompGuy
Posted Hide Post
quote:
There has to be substance behind an observation to reach a meaningful conclusion. There also has to be an independent determination of linkage of the phenomena.

You're confusing two different things. It's perfectly OK to publish data--that's research too. Conclusions based on the data can be the matter of further experimentation and data gathering. There's no need or expectation to publish a fully-formed body of work in a single paper. In particular, I don't see how the first researchers who publish are going to have "an independent determination of linkage" at all. Isn't that for later papers and further research?

We're not dealing here with objective laboratory science. This is not a controlled situation, as you could have in a prison or hospital experiment. You're dealing with kids and many influences and parameters over which the experimenters have no control.

But the main point of this research was to demonstrate that changing food choices in middle schools would influence obesity rates of the school's students. So far, at least, the evidence hasn't shown that.

Jeff
 
Posts: 7848 | Location: US | Mbr Since: 10-12-2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of purplepentode
Posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by CompGuy:
You're confusing two different things. It's perfectly OK to publish data--that's research too.

1. I'm not confused.
2. You said it was easy. I didn't.
3. It's not okay to merely publish data. That's not science.
4. The results of the study are inconclusive. There's no information to gauge the credibility of the data or the experiments used to acquire it. The study abstract upon which you've judged this finding is not scientifically meaningful. You seem to think otherwise.
5. There's good science and bad science. I'm sorry you can't tell the difference.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What's a purple pentode? Why, it's one that's gassy!
 
Posts: 11386 | Location: USA | Mbr Since: 10-07-2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Forum Host
Picture of CompGuy
Posted Hide Post
This is getting silly.
1. I didn't say you were confused; I said you confused two different things.
2. I explained what the "it" was that was easy--it wasn't what you thought I was saying. I admitted I wasn't clear.
3. Of course science is publishing data. It can be more, but publishing data is perfectly acceptable.
4. I agreed that the abstract is a poor substitute for reading the full paper. I pointed out it costs $32 to read the full paper online. You haven't read it either.
5. I don't know whether this is good science or not without reading the paper. Your own point is that you can't tell the difference from an abstract. I already agreed with you. So how can you now say it's bad science? Taking your own argument, you could only say that you don't know whether or not it's bad science.

It's not really pure science anyway--it's more sociology/psychology with all the accompanying inadequacies of a study in the real world and not a laboratory.

Jeff
 
Posts: 7848 | Location: US | Mbr Since: 10-12-2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of purplepentode
Posted Hide Post
Look up "Science."

Publishing data isn't science.
Good science isn't confined solely to a laboratory.

I do know, on the basis of what has already been said, that Van Hook's work is not good science. I've already said it and why.

You're entitled to your opinion.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What's a purple pentode? Why, it's one that's gassy!
 
Posts: 11386 | Location: USA | Mbr Since: 10-07-2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Forum Host
Picture of CompGuy
Posted Hide Post
http://apps.facebook.com/daily...unch-butterworth-1-3

Some background (since I can't quote the full article). Years ago James Oliver went on a campaign in Great Britain to get the schools to put freshly made nutritional food on the menus. He was very successful. Schools got lots of money to implement the new standard.

quote:


In a remarkable piece of survey research, public health experts at Oxford University went out into schools to get the consumer perspective just as the new nutritional rules were coming into effect. Far from being drones for Big Food, it turns out, the kids were well aware of the differences between healthy and unhealthy diets. However, here’s the problem: Health was not the driving force in deciding what to eat. Instead, lunch breaks were valued as time to socialize with their peers, which meant that vending machine food was the most efficient way of maximizing this social time. You didn’t have to line up — and you weren’t restricted to eating in an ugly canteen (which was another complaint).

Even more astonishing, the kids turned out to be instinctively libertarian: As the study notes, they were “often vociferous in defending their supposed ‘rights’ ” — and “frustrated with the government for imposing ‘unfair’ and ‘harsh’ policies on their freedom.” As one grade-school kid put it to the Oxford researchers, “We decide what we eat. It’s not their [the government’s] choice. It’s our freedom of eating.”

And so it came to pass that kids rebelled against the new government menus by bringing their own food to school; and when the schools tried to regulate that according to the new nutritional guidelines, the kids simply went off campus to buy food from shops and cafes. Predictably, this led some adults to argue that these establishments should be outlawed — to which the British health secretary said, in effect, where does this end?

It certainly doesn’t seem to end in weight loss. “The fruit and veg campaign in the U.K. has been very expensive and had no impact on obesity,” said Professor Thomas Sanders, professor of nutrition and dietetics at King’s College London. “There is high awareness of the five [servings] a day campaign and it is the overweight and obese who are most likely to report eating five a day!”


Just another example of the point I made earlier...

Jeff
 
Posts: 7848 | Location: US | Mbr Since: 10-12-2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata       Page: 1 2  
 

    Aantares    Aantares BB  Hop To Forum Categories  Your News, Money, Sports  Hop To Forums  News    Study: Junk food sold in middle schools doesn't cause obesity

© 2003-2012 Aantares Online LLC. All Rights Reserved.