Nutrition

Integrative Medicine

In nutrition, what is the difference between a clinical study and an epidemiological study?

Clinical vs. Epidemiological Studies: Exploring Nutrition Research

In nutrition. What's the difference between a clinical study and an epidemiological study? That is a great question. I'm glad you asked. So an epidemiological study is an observational study, they basically set up cameras and they watch what people do they observe. And then they correlate the actions that they observe with the outcomes. Like, for example, how much fiber do people eat, how much heart disease, do they get? These are great ways to generate. After sees, they are terrible ways to generate Health policy. There are meant to observe what happens in the notice that there's certain things that seem to be connected and then you make a hypothesis, it maybe there's some causal connection, we don't know that there's any causal connection. We only know that we observe those two things together in Denmark. For example, they have observed for decades that the more storks in a certain area, the more babies will those things are correlated but there are certainly not One does, it doesn't cause the other. Now, a clinical study is quite different to clinical study. You take two matched groups to groups of people or subjects that are as closely matched as possible. On medical history age, sex medications, whatever it is. And then they attempt to give the two people, two groups, identical treatment except for one variable and that variable is often a drug. It could be a diet, it could be the Suzuki method of learning, I mean but that's the one thing that's different between the two groups that's the clinical study and at the end of the study they see if there is a difference between the two groups and they can make a pretty good. Guess that if there is it's because of the thing that they were testing. So that's the difference one observes and one actually manipulates things to see if there is in fact a likelihood that Item a caused result. Be we do not know that with observational studies, we just make some very good educated guesses which should then generate more research of the clinical kind

An epidemiological study is an observational study that observes what people do and correlates it with certain outcomes, while a clinical study takes two groups of people and gives them identical treatment except for one variable to see if there is a difference between the two groups.

https://assets.anyquestion.com/raw/upload/gnlcn0ut4qvvjgjbldzp.vtt

The difference between a clinical study and an epidemiological study in nutrition is significant. An epidemiological study is an observational study where researchers observe people's behaviors and correlate them with outcomes. For example, they may observe the amount of fiber people consume and the occurrence of heart disease. These studies generate hypotheses and identify potential connections but are not suitable for generating health policies. They can only establish correlations, not causation.

On the other hand, a clinical study is different. It involves two closely matched groups of individuals who receive identical treatment except for one variable, such as a drug or a specific diet. Researchers then compare the outcomes between the two groups to determine if there is a difference. This type of study allows for a more accurate assessment of causation. If a difference is observed, it is likely due to the variable being tested.

In summary, epidemiological studies observe and correlate behaviors and outcomes, while clinical studies manipulate variables to establish a likelihood of causation. Observational studies generate hypotheses, while clinical studies provide more concrete evidence that can inform further research.

How does magnesium threonate affect the brain?

Unlocking the Power of Magnesium Threonate for a Healthy Brain

How does magnesium three and eight affect the brain. So, magnesium 3, and 8 is a particular form of magnesium. Magnesium is always bound to something. So, if you look at the back of your magnesium supplements, going to say, either magnesium, citrate, magnesium, carbonate, and magnesium glycinate magnesium, oxide or magnesium, three and eight. Now, you need magnesium throughout your body and you need a lot of it. You need it for 80% of the stuff that happens in your body. Depends on magnesium, 300 different biochemical. I need magnesium, so it's needed throughout the body, but not all of it gets into the brain so well, and three, and eight really does. And why does that matter because magnesium circulating magnesium levels in the brain have been associated with less dementia with maybe more cognitive functioning. There's some evidence that magnesium 3 and 8 because it's magnesium that basically gets into the brain. May be neuroprotective. So, it's basically a magnesium. Mmm that you can count on to actually wind up or at least some of it to wind up in the brain. And that seems to be very good thing. So that's that's the story on that. It's a great form of magnesium to take.

Magnesium 3 and 8 is a form of magnesium that gets into the brain better than other forms, and may be associated with less dementia and better cognitive functioning. It is recommended as a great form of magnesium to take.

https://assets.anyquestion.com/raw/upload/upsq6rlkorgk2pdpmhez.vtt

Magnesium threonate, also known as magnesium 3 and 8, is a specific form of magnesium that has an impact on the brain. Magnesium is typically bound to other substances in supplements, such as citrate, carbonate, glycinate, oxide, or threonate. While magnesium is essential for various bodily functions, not all forms of magnesium effectively cross the blood-brain barrier.

Magnesium threonate, however, has shown the ability to penetrate the brain more effectively. This is significant because magnesium levels in the brain have been associated with reduced risk of dementia and improved cognitive function. There is evidence suggesting that magnesium threonate may have neuroprotective properties.

In summary, magnesium threonate is a form of magnesium that can effectively reach the brain. This makes it a promising option for supporting brain health.

What is the most important study design limitation in the science of diet and health outcomes?

The major limitation in diet and health studies: flawed epidemiological research.

Well, here's another brilliant question that we could spend four hours on what's the most important study design, limitation in the science of diet and health outcomes. It's a very broad field with a lot of problems and a lot to say about that. But let me take nutrition studies as a rule and the biggest flaw that I consider the flaws that I can see in nutritional studies. And the number one with a bullet is that almost all of them are epidemiological or, ah, Gervais tional, they're not clinical. They didn't take two groups and feed one of them. One thing in the other one, the other and make sure they're matched on every single criteria and then look at the outcomes know. They take large populations and here's the second limitation. They give them food frequency questionnaire as which is the absolute most idiotic way to get data. Think about it. They give you a big sheet of paper and they say how many times in the last six months? Did you eat a product that had beans in it or had cornstarch in it or whatever? The question is, nobody remembers what? They ate even yesterday, let alone six months ago, they're horribly. Bad ways to collect data, and then they use that data as an observational study, they don't change anything. They just said these people ate this, and this is what happened. So, what these studies show is a correlation. And as I say, very often, when I talk about this, there's a correlation in Denmark between the number of storks that come in a certain Village and the number of babies that are born, that's of correlation doesn't mean that the stalks of bringing the babies. And we have a lot of nutrition studies like that. You eat saturated fat, you get heart disease, you get that. There is a lot of correlational studies. Correlation studies are great, epidemiological studies are great as a way of generating, a hip arthas's to study in a randomized control study, they're not great for Public Policy yet we use them that way all the time and that's kind of been the mission of my career. We use ridiculous epidemiological studies in nutrition to determine what people should be eating. Yeah, and it's just lousy research.

The most important study design and limitation in the science of diet and health outcomes is that almost all studies are epidemiological or observational, meaning they don't take two groups and feed one of them one thing and the other something else. Additionally, these studies often use food frequency questionnaires which are unreliable as people can't remember what they ate even yesterday, let alone six months ago. As a result, the studies only show correlations and not causal relationships, yet they are used to inform public policy.

https://assets.anyquestion.com/raw/upload/ba8j3i72gkpzgnmoism0.vtt

The most significant study design limitation in the science of diet and health outcomes, particularly in nutrition studies, is the reliance on epidemiological or observational studies. These studies involve large populations and often use food frequency questionnaires to collect data. However, this method is flawed as it relies on people's memory of their eating habits, which is unreliable. These observational studies only show correlations between certain dietary factors and health outcomes, but they do not establish causation.

Using correlational studies to make public policy decisions regarding nutrition is problematic. These studies cannot provide the level of evidence needed for reliable recommendations. Randomized controlled trials, where two groups are compared after being fed different diets, are considered more robust and reliable for drawing conclusions.

The overreliance on observational studies in nutrition research has been a point of concern for many experts in the field. It is important to recognize the limitations of these studies and strive for more rigorous research methods to inform public policy and dietary recommendations.

Can you share any specific examples of how the Great Cholesterol Myth has impacted the way physicians practice medicine?

Book on Cholesterol Challenges Norms, Influences Medical Practice

The question is if I can share any specific examples of how the great cholesterol myth has impacted the way physicians practice medicine. Well I can tell you that I've gotten a couple of letters from MDs who've said that the book has changed the way they practice and that is that is very gratifying to me and it was very gratifying to Steve Sinatra when he was alive and I think the way that it perhaps impacted the way these doctors have practiced is that they're a little bit more willing to look beyond just the standard talking points about heart disease. It's all about cholesterol, we're measuring it accurately with this ridiculous good and bad division and I think that they're more willing to look under the hood now to see you know what we know a lot more about cholesterol than we did in 1963. It's a lot more complicated than good and bad and they're starting to look at numbers like ApoB, like the particle test, advanced lipid profiles and to look at all of the factors like inflammation and oxidation and stress and sleep deprivation and exposure to toxins all the other things that contribute to heart disease that we just haven't been talking about and I think if anything it's that broadening of perspective that I'm the most gratified by when I hear doctors tell me that the book influenced their practice.

The great cholesterol myth has impacted the way physicians practice medicine by broadening their perspective and making them look beyond standard talking points about heart disease. They are now looking more closely at factors such as inflammation, oxidation, stress, sleep deprivation, and exposure to toxins, in addition to measuring cholesterol accurately with advanced lipid profiles.

https://assets.anyquestion.com/raw/upload/loz5nqgdpzol4a3u8yug.vtt

I've received letters from MDs who have shared that the book, The Great Cholesterol Myth, has impacted the way they practice medicine. This feedback has been gratifying for both myself and Steve Sinatra. The book has influenced these doctors to look beyond the standard talking points about heart disease, which primarily revolve around cholesterol. They now recognize that cholesterol is more complex than the simplistic good and bad division established in 1963. Instead, they explore factors like ApoB, particle tests, advanced lipid profiles, inflammation, oxidation, stress, sleep deprivation, and exposure to toxins that contribute to heart disease. The book has broadened their perspectives and encouraged a more holistic approach to understanding and addressing heart disease. It's rewarding to hear that the book has influenced doctors in this way.

Unlocking the Power of Alpha Lipoic Acid: Benefits and Beyond

So, the question is, what is the alpha lipoic acid alpha? Lipoic acid is compound, it's made in the body and just about every cell. It's found a little bit in food but you can never get enough to make any difference whatsoever but it's big claim to fame. Is it does three major things? One is it helps lower blood sugar too. Is it's an incredibly good liver, support nutrients and helps with detoxification when I was treating my own hepatitis C, which I had until they invented that Miracle eight week. Cure and I had hepatitis C actively for about 20 years. I use 1200 mg of alpha lipoic acid as part of my nutritional protocol for protecting my liver and keeping my liver enzymes from going nuts. But the third thing that alpha lipoic acid is known for is its a powerful antioxidant and it's kind of a specialist antioxidant because what it does is it allows vitamin E and vitamin C to recirculate. It. So it kind of gives you a restart on both of those very important antioxidants, giving you a kind of double duty and turbocharging them and letting them recycle and be used again. Very, very powerful nutrient, not one of the things you can get from food and if your health professional recommends it as a additional supplement to take, I would take that recommendation seriously because alpha lipoic acid can do you a lot of good.

Alpha lipoic acid is a compound made in the body which helps to lower blood sugar, support the liver, and act as an antioxidant by allowing vitamin E and C to recirculate. It is recommended to take alpha lipoic acid as a supplement if advised by a healthcare professional, as it has many health benefits.

https://assets.anyquestion.com/raw/upload/zaszw9iglh8wrncpqq1n.vtt

Alpha lipoic acid is a compound that is naturally produced in the body and found in almost every cell. While it is present in some foods, it is difficult to obtain enough through diet alone to make a significant impact. Alpha lipoic acid is known for three main benefits.

Firstly, it helps lower blood sugar levels. Secondly, it is a highly effective nutrient for liver support and detoxification. It has been used in protocols to protect the liver and maintain healthy liver enzyme levels. 

Thirdly, alpha lipoic acid is a powerful antioxidant. It has a unique role in allowing vitamin E and vitamin C to recycle and be used again, enhancing their antioxidant effects. This makes it a valuable nutrient for overall antioxidant support.

Since alpha lipoic acid is not easily obtained from food, if a healthcare professional recommends it as an additional supplement, it is worth considering, as it can provide significant benefits to your health.

How does the ApoB test work, and why is it a good predictor of heart disease risk?

APOB Test: A Valuable Predictor of Heart Disease

How does the APOB test work and why is it a good predictor of heart disease risk? The APOB is a protein that wraps around every single LDL or VLDL particle. So it's a great surrogate for the test I always tell everybody to get, which is the particle test, the advanced lipid profile that measures the number of particles in circulation, the number of lipoproteins in circulation. But doctors often won't order that, it's not covered by insurance. APOB is a very standard test and it works just as well. Basically because an APOB protein wraps around every LDL and every VLDL, it's basically telling you how many potentially damaging particles there are in circulation. And that is a very, very important metric to get. And that's why a lot of people, including Peter Atiyah, have moved from recommending the particle test, the advanced lipid profile, to recommending the APOB test. It's easier to get, easier to get your doctor to order it, it's cheaper, and it's more standardized. It's a very, very good metric to know when you're looking at your heart disease risk.

The APOB test measures the number of potentially damaging particles in circulation, which is a very important metric to know when it comes to heart disease risk. It is easier and cheaper than the advanced lipid profile, but works just as well.

https://assets.anyquestion.com/raw/upload/z7vmddazyqj9xizshrnj.vtt

The APOB test is a good predictor of heart disease risk because the APOB protein wraps around every LDL or VLDL particle. This protein serves as a surrogate for the particle test, which measures the number of lipoproteins in circulation. While the particle test may not always be ordered or covered by insurance, the APOB test is more accessible, affordable, and standardized. By measuring the APOB protein, the test provides valuable information about the number of potentially damaging particles in circulation, making it an important metric for assessing heart disease risk. Many experts, including Peter Atiyah, now recommend the APOB test as a reliable alternative to the particle test.

Neither AnyQuestion nor its Experts provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment or otherwise provide professional healthcare services.

Physician disclaimer

Jonny Bowden, PhD, CNS answers your Integrative Medicine questions. See all the advice Jonny Bowden, PhD, CNS has and get answers to your own Integrative Medicine questions.

Follow me on AnyQuestion

Jonny Bowden began his career as a jazz musician, studying under Herbie Hancock and at Juilliard before earning degrees in music & psychology from NYU. He found his passion for nutrition while working as a pianist for Alvin Ailey Dance Theatre. Bowden changed careers and earned 6 personal training certifications, a psychology masters, and a nutrition PhD. He was the Dean of the Equinox Fitness Training Institute for 4 years and became a board-certified nutritionist. Bowden has penned 15 books, including best-sellers "The Great Cholesterol Myth," "Living Low Carb," and "150 Healthiest Foods on Earth”. He's a worldwide speaker, has appeared on every major network (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox, MSNBC), has been interviewed on dozens of podcasts, and featured in The NYT, Men’s Health, Woman’s World, Forbes Online, GQ, Cosmo, Self, Prevention, InStyle, Shape, and O, The Oprah Magazine. Known as The Nutrition Mythbuster™, Bowden is committed to debunking health myths and speaking truth to power.