http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 111815.php
Thoughts on this recent meta-analysis out of China?
Thoughts on this recent meta-analysis out of China?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Click Here if you want to upgrade your account
If you were able to post but cannot do so now, send an email to admin at raypeatforum dot com and include your username and we will fix that right up for you.
Agent207 said:post 111256 drinking orange juice before getting out of bed?? lol
You can still be awake (or in this case, have just woken up) while on the bed, right? :)Agent207 said:post 111256 drinking orange juice before getting out of bed?? lol
DrJ said:post 111250 I don't know why people even pay attention to studies that are meta-analysis. Meta-analysis absolutely spits in the face of the philosophy of science which is essentially to test a hypothesis repeatedly in a VERY controlled way to either reject it or not reject it. Meta-analysis takes a bunch of different studies with widely varying methodologies and possibly very different degrees of control (or none at all) for confounding variables and then tries to draw an affirmative conclusion from it . It's stupid. Science only rejects hypothesis or does not reject. It never fully affirms anything, it only disproves. When I was still in academia, I always viewed meta-analysis as a route for opportunists to try to get their name on a "most-cited" list to get tenure or whatever, but other than that, it has no real value.
icecreamlover said:post 111262Agent207 said:post 111256 drinking orange juice before getting out of bed?? lol
If you haven't replaced your night stand with a mini fridge you're doing it wrong
icecreamlover said:post 111262Agent207 said:post 111256 drinking orange juice before getting out of bed?? lol
If you haven't replaced your night stand with a mini fridge you're doing it wrong
jaa said:post 111244 http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 111815.php
Thoughts on this recent meta-analysis out of China?
haidut said:post 111385jaa said:post 111244 http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 111815.php
Thoughts on this recent meta-analysis out of China?
How do you know what was causing the high heart rate? Most people have high adrenaline at night, so of course that would be an expected result. As a counter example, there are studies showing hyperthyroidism protects from all cause mortality and most hyperthyroid people have high heart rates.
Until a see a study that controls for adrenaline and thyroid status, and knowing the average stress/metabolic status of people over the age of 30, I would rename this study to "High Adrenaline at Night Linked to Higher Risk of All-Cause Mortality".
Brilliant! I love the education I get on this forum.DrJ said:post 111250 I don't know why people even pay attention to studies that are meta-analysis. Meta-analysis absolutely spits in the face of the philosophy of science which is essentially to test a hypothesis repeatedly in a VERY controlled way to either reject it or not reject it. Meta-analysis takes a bunch of different studies with widely varying methodologies and possibly very different degrees of control (or none at all) for confounding variables and then tries to draw an affirmative conclusion from it . It's stupid. Science only rejects hypothesis or does not reject. It never fully affirms anything, it only disproves. When I was still in academia, I always viewed meta-analysis as a route for opportunists to try to get their name on a "most-cited" list to get tenure or whatever, but other than that, it has no real value.
DrJ said:post 111250 I don't know why people even pay attention to studies that are meta-analysis. Meta-analysis absolutely spits in the face of the philosophy of science which is essentially to test a hypothesis repeatedly in a VERY controlled way to either reject it or not reject it. Meta-analysis takes a bunch of different studies with widely varying methodologies and possibly very different degrees of control (or none at all) for confounding variables and then tries to draw an affirmative conclusion from it . It's stupid. Science only rejects hypothesis or does not reject. It never fully affirms anything, it only disproves. When I was still in academia, I always viewed meta-analysis as a route for opportunists to try to get their name on a "most-cited" list to get tenure or whatever, but other than that, it has no real value.
Such_Saturation said:post 111429DrJ said:post 111250 I don't know why people even pay attention to studies that are meta-analysis. Meta-analysis absolutely spits in the face of the philosophy of science which is essentially to test a hypothesis repeatedly in a VERY controlled way to either reject it or not reject it. Meta-analysis takes a bunch of different studies with widely varying methodologies and possibly very different degrees of control (or none at all) for confounding variables and then tries to draw an affirmative conclusion from it . It's stupid. Science only rejects hypothesis or does not reject. It never fully affirms anything, it only disproves. When I was still in academia, I always viewed meta-analysis as a route for opportunists to try to get their name on a "most-cited" list to get tenure or whatever, but other than that, it has no real value.
I think I got what you need
A meta-analysis of meta-analyses.
If you haven't replaced your night stand with a mini fridge you're doing it wrong
How do you know what was causing the high heart rate? Most people have high adrenaline at night, so of course that would be an expected result. As a counter example, there are studies showing hyperthyroidism protects from all cause mortality and most hyperthyroid people have high heart rates.
Until a see a study that controls for adrenaline and thyroid status, and knowing the average stress/metabolic status of people over the age of 30, I would rename this study to "High Adrenaline at Night Linked to Higher Risk of All-Cause Mortality".
"Our analyses show a positive association between RHR and the risk of cancer mortality, suggesting that a RHR less than 60 bpm seems to be a protective factor against the risk of cancer mortality."Resting Heart Rate as a Predictor of Cancer Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
This work was aimed to synthetize the evidence available about the relationship between resting heart rate (RHR) and the risk of cancer mortality. A computerized search in the Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from their ...www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
This paper is linking higher RHR with cancer mortality
"Our analyses show a positive association between RHR and the risk of cancer mortality, suggesting that a RHR less than 60 bpm seems to be a protective factor against the risk of cancer mortality."
Wtf! less than 60 bpm??? I don't think my heart rate has ever measured that low. Even half asleep at night.