Does anyone else like to read research?

So I think I'm just weird, but I'd much rather read something primary source than secondary.  Whenever someone references a secondary source in an argument I have to see if there's any real research behind it.  It's time-consuming, but I think it keeps me from getting sucked into believing things simply because a lot of people keep repeating them.

So, if you've read any interesting primary research lately, please post!

Here's one on green tea and pepper consumption's effects on appetite: http://www.sciencedirect.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu .edu/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WCM-4W 09GD0-1&_user=56861&_rdoc=1&_fmt= &_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor= &view=c&_acct=C000059542&_version =1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=56861&md 5=d88ed28cc641ecb993f4e6aa84bce3b6

I read textbooks.... I'm weirder! Doesn't matter what kind of textbook. I read from psychology to random math books to history books... I even do the problems in the book!

Your link requires a sign in so I couldn't read it.

I usually look for a trusted source to interpret the research.  I especially like the Mayo Clinic and The Harvard School of Public Health websites.  Also, the NIH and CDC are reliable.

I LOVE research! The problem is, no research study is without its limitations - that's the real rub. You have to be able to interpret the limitations of the study and what impact it had on the research findings, in order to weigh the value of those findings.

Many times, findings of a research study are blatantly misinterpreted. For example, if a research study reports that Group A eats bananas all day and has less heart disease, people think that eating bananas all day causes less heart disease (and this is how the mainstream news media reports it)- wrong! There has to be a cause and effect proven, and cause and effect research is the most difficult to do (on humans)and the most difficult to prove - although it is also extremely valuable research.

Time magazine's recent article on exercise and weight loss is a perfect example. i never read more grosslly misinterpreted research in my life. They did a great disservice to their readers.

Clairelane is right - read research from reliable sources - although you still need to read with a discerning eye.

I agree that there are limitations, but when you think about the fact that 99 percent of people just listen to what they're told by their personal trainer, doctor, friends at the pub, etc.... research is definitely the way to go.  I don't trust anyone to interpret things correctly anymore.  Everyone has an agenda to push, no exceptions.

I agree! There is a body of work that suggests that lack of vitamin C can reduce the collagen we need and weaken the walls of our arteries so the body lays down plaque to strengthen these arterial walls. Medicaly it is noted to be a problem and we are given many different kinds of medications to reduce cholesterol and the build up of our arterials walls. NO ONE suggests that we also take some C to build up the collagen which will allow the body to not need to defend itself.

Nenke

What is the title and source of the article on green tea and pepper.  The link req's a sign in for ASU students, which I am not, but I'd like to get the article through my university's library.

Thank you.

Research is good.  Like you, I like to read the primary sources and also work to understand the statistics used.  The numbers and how the study is designed makes a HUGE difference on the validity of the results. 

As an example, many nutrition studies are historical retrospective studies that rely on what information patients report. The person may be questioned about vitamins they take.  If the specific information about exactly what vitamin formulations are consumed or exact amounts recorded, then that has to be taken into account for the results.

Just some food for thought when reading research....

I do. Sometimes I get interested in a random subject and just look for new stuff on it. I used to pick a different topic to research every month, even if It was not school related.

I'm definitely on board with going to primary sources for research.  What kills me is every time a new study about nutrition comes out in the popular media, certain friends and members of my family take it for face value and quote it constantly! 

It is SO important to remember that studies follow the rules of academia that are not always directly applicable in the real world.  Yes, there may be a correlation between a certain food and a corresponding health effect, but positive or negative correlations are often published as conclusive in the realm of academia even if the percentages are miniscule!  Besides which, scientific 'discoveries' are constantly being disproved.  This sort of information is not often delved into on popular shows/in popular newspapers and magazines.  So take everything with a grain of salt!

An interesting study that I found shed a bit more light on the circumstances of the "dark chocolate is healthy fad".  I have yet to find the primary source but this article gives a pretty thorough rundown of the method and results.

http://www.webmd.com/diet/news/20030827/dark- chocolate-is-healthy-chocolate

I am having a really eye opening experience regarding food and my body as I am reading "In Defense of Food". I am about halfway through and am really impressed with the book. It is not the primary source as you say but he lays out the information well and has sources to a lot of great primary information. A great read for anyone who is frustrated with all the mis-information they are receiving about their diets. Eating and staying at a healthy weight can really be an easy thing if we understand the food we are (or are not) putting into our bodies.

I really like to do that. It's kind of fun to learn, I think, in a weird sort of way. I like learning what exercises are useful for what and how certain foods are beneficial. I've learned a lot, and it's not the kind of information that you're never going to use in life, either. :)

Holy crap!  And here I've been thinking I'm the only person I know who actually likes researching things!  All sorts of things.  People in my life make fun of me for it, but so be it; it's a hobby of mine.  Hey, do you think we should start up Researchers Anonymous or something? 

This is the first I've posted on calorie count.  Maybe this will encourage me to do so again.  I find everybody's posts and opinions to be fascinating reading.  

Original Post by breedom:

What is the title and source of the article on green tea and pepper.  The link req's a sign in for ASU students, which I am not, but I'd like to get the article through my university's library.

Thank you

 

Effects of capsaicin, green tea and CH-19 sweet pepper on appetite and energy intake in humans in negative and positive energy balance

 

Authors:H.C. Reinbacha, A. Smeetsb, T. Martinussenc, P. Møllera and M.S. Westerterp-Plantenga

Original Post by nenke:

I agree! There is a body of work that suggests that lack of vitamin C can reduce the collagen we need and weaken the walls of our arteries so the body lays down plaque to strengthen these arterial walls. Medicaly it is noted to be a problem and we are given many different kinds of medications to reduce cholesterol and the build up of our arterials walls. NO ONE suggests that we also take some C to build up the collagen which will allow the body to not need to defend itself.

Nenke

 

I heard something similar in my cell biology class relating high blood pressure medications to high cholesterol (or vise versa...) that made perfect sense and would suggest that you try everything that you can do naturally before trying these medications that harm one thing while fixing another.

Original Post by yeneka:

Holy crap!  And here I've been thinking I'm the only person I know who actually likes researching things!  All sorts of things.  People in my life make fun of me for it, but so be it; it's a hobby of mine.  Hey, do you think we should start up Researchers Anonymous or something? 

This is the first I've posted on calorie count.  Maybe this will encourage me to do so again.  I find everybody's posts and opinions to be fascinating reading.  

 Haha!  I post all the time - whether it makes people like me or not :/.  It would be neat to make a group on the site where people could just cite things they found, organized into topic etc.

I also like to see primary sources, even though:

(a) their statistics are (or were) quite often rubbish - when I was studying statistics, we examined a random selection of studies to see if the stats in them matched the stated findings - the majority (more than two thirds from memory) either did not or were hopelessly unreliable.

(b) it also helps to know who funded the research - a huge number of studies go unreported. Those funded by pharmaceutical companies have a reputation for not seeing the light of day if they get the 'wrong' results.

I like to read research, defently more than fiction. I am an anthropology major and I have had to read a lot of books and articles. Some of them I get so hooked on that I read more than I actually have to.

Ooh, oooh, pick me, pick me!

 I love reading research - it's a real brain buzz to figure out how things are interconnected ;)