Quote (dogboston @ Aug 22 2016 08:57pm)
Weak study, only 30 participants, no mention of controlling confounders, and huge error bars in almost all their graphs....
Take this one with a grain of salt boys and girls.
they did a standardized job of controlling for things, such as diet and activity, that might influence MPS, 30 participants is a big sample size for a biopsy study using 6 bergstrom samples from each subject, and those are confidence intervals not error bars
e: regardless, my original point was that nutritional research cant even agree with itself
This post was edited by cloudkicker on Aug 22 2016 08:21pm