|
|
(HealthNewsDigest.com) – Everyone that writes about health relies on research findings. We report the latest research. Then you try to decide if it will affect your health. With the internet and our 24-hour news cycle you have access to a great deal of scientific information. Interpreting and using this information is the challenge. Asking yourself a few key questions when you hear about new research can help you decide if this is information that you can or should put to use.
Was the research done in the laboratory or was it a clinical trial? Lab research on cells or animals can lead to promising results but it can take years for these findings to translate into patient care. View this research with interest, but don’t make changes in your life based on the findings. Clinical trials and epidemiological studies look at people.
Clinical trials normally start with a small group of people then expand to a larger and more diverse group. The larger trials let us see the effect on different sexes, ages, races or even different health conditions. If the results are positive then they may affect you and it might be time to discuss the issue with your doctor. A good example of this process is the connection between high blood pressure and the risk for heart disease. We know from multiple clinical trials on both drugs and diet that controlling high blood prevents heart attacks and strokes. We know that this information holds true for both men and women of different races and for those that are young and those that are older. Because of this broad agreement in research findings we can make a general public health recommendation to treat high blood pressure to promote better health for the population at large.
Epidemiological studies look at data from lots of people to try and find patterns. These observational studies often have thousands of participants which gives strength to the results. But, the people are free living so there are too many variables to show an absolute cause and effect. For example, one observational study showed that women who drank the most diet beverages had the most heart disease. They also were more likely to smoke, have diabetes, be overweight, and have high blood pressure. The one thing they all had in common was diet drinks, but this group of women were already predisposed to heart disease regardless of their beverage choice. The study showed a correlation between diet drinks and heart disease but not an actual cause and effect.
The next research study needed with this group would be to take some of the women, change their drink of choice, leave everything else in their life the same, and see if their heart disease risk went down. And, that is often exactly what happens from observational study results, a more precise clinical trial is developed to test actual causation. Because the original study was done on woman, another needed step would be to see if the results held for men.
By now you should be seeing a pattern of what to look for in research.
- Was the study done in a lab or on people?
- Was the study size small or large?
- Did the study include both men and women?
- Did the study include people of different ages and races?
- Where the participants free living, so that actual cause and effect would be harder to tease out?
- Was the study published in a reputable scientific journal or was it simply reported from testimonial evidence?
- Where the results of the latest study consistent with earlier studies which supports the overall findings of many researchers working on the same problem.
We need to consider research as an ongoing conversation. You can’t look at one study in isolation. Every study offers its data into the research conversation. Some studies show a breakthrough in knowledge. Other studies may point out complications that need to be addressed so no one is harmed. Many studies just add a few more baby steps to keep the research heading forward. Sometimes research brings us to a dead end. This is not considered a failure, it just eliminates a path to follow in the future. For example, finding out that something does not cause heart disease is a good thing, because research efforts won’t be wasted in that direction. And, most importantly, every study adds to the accumulation of data we can use to make recommendation for the better health of the population at large.
© NRH Nutrition Consultants, Inc.
Jo-Ann Heslin, MA, RD, CDN is a registered dietitian and the author of the nutrition counter series for Pocket Books with sales of more than 8.5 million books.
Look for:
The Diabetes Counter, 5th Ed., 2014
The Fat and Cholesterol Counter, 2014
The Most Complete Food Counter, 3rd ed., 2013
The Calorie Counter, 6th Ed., 2013
The Complete Food Counter, 4th ed., 2012
The Protein Counter, 3rd Ed., 2011
The Ultimate Carbohydrate Counter, 3rd Ed., 2010
The Healthy Wholefoods Counter, 2008
Your Complete Food Counter App: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/your-complete-food-counter/id444558777?mt=8
For more information on Jo-Ann and her books, go to: www.TheNutritionExperts.com.
###
For advertising and promotion on HealthNewsDigest.com please contact Mike McCurdy:[email protected] or 877-634-9180
HealthNewsDigest.com is syndicated worldwide, to thousands of journalists in all media, and health-related websites. www.HealthNewsDigest.com