Comment by mattmanser | Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattmanser | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

What's eye opening about this as well is low carb diets lose you 4 years of life, compared to 1 year of life in a high carb diet.

we estimated that a 50-year-old participant with intake of less than 30% of energy from carbohydrate would have a projected life expectancy of 29·1 years, compared with 33·1 years for a participant who consumed 50–55% of energy from carbohydrate (difference 4·0 years [95% CI 2·6, 5·3]). Similarly, we estimated that a 50-year-old participant with high carbohydrate intake (>65% of energy from carbohydrate) would have a projected life expectancy of 32·0 years, compared with 33·1 years

No, it means that the people who were compelled to follow a low carbohydrate diet for one reason on another lived shorter. It doesn't tell you anything unless you know why they followed the diet they followed.

Hi ho, greetings to the rabid HN paleo crew, how you doing?

You're all over this thread like a bad rash.

Wha? I was never into paleo, I think it's stupid, every damn vegetable and animal has changed since, and it's not like we are sure people actually were so much better of back then...

I assume you already know that correlation does not equal causation.

In this study, the higher smoking, higher diabetic, lowest exercising, and higher male cohort were more likely to die. To ascribe causality on the diet, one that is not even a low carb diet is absolute bullshit.

This is far more interesting...

  So, the "low Carb group" (Q1):
    had higher % of smokers,
    had higher % of diabetics,
    exercised less,
    had higher % of men.

I don't trust the study results at all.

It's possible to control for these factors by adjusting your expected outcomes accordingly. Not saying they did since I haven't bothered to read the study though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com