Junk Food Linked With Increased Depression Risk: Study

[DalTheJigsaw123]

We did not need a study to tell us this. However, this is complimentary.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/31/junk-food-depression_n_1392093.html

[konchog uma]

cool. i don't need to read it (in the same spirit as we don't need a study to tell us this) but im glad you posted it

 

eat nourishing food!!@!

[zanshin]

Okay, but we should understand implications of studies, correlation does not show causation. People becoming depressed may not be at a place where they care about nourishing food and eat what's convenient, so the depression could cause the junk food eating. Life stress and being sedentary could be tertiary factors that causes both.

[Owledge]

Is that article for real? Are they serious?

 

"Researchers from the University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and the University of Granada found that the people who regularly eat these foods are also more likely to be more sedentary, smoke, eat other not-so-nutritious foods and work 45 or more hours a week."

This ridiculous connection indicates as clear as it can get that they are confusing cause and effect here. Are they really claiming that junk food makes people work a lot? Isn't it common knowledge that when you work long hours, you tend to take less time for eating proper food and prefer convenience?

 

Now, I thought, hey, they did a study. That should clarify things. But then...

 

"The study included 8,964 people who didn't have depression (and weren't taking any antidepressant drugs) at the start of the study. Their depression statuses and diets were tracked for an average of six months.

 

At the end of the study period, 493 people were depressed or were taking antidepressants. The researchers found that the ones who ate the most junk food were 51 percent more likely to develop depression, compared with people who ate the least of these foods."

This is not only how you do a study if you don't wanto to find out the truth, but if you want to lose all scientific credibility. Why on earth didn't they do it the way it is always done in proper studies and give the people instructions about what they have to eat - half of them junk food, half of them health food?

Not to mention that the highlighted sentence is illogical or at least unprecise, which is the writer's fault. You cannot delineate a group using the word "most" and then apply a precise percentage result to them.

 

 

Now you know why I don't accept universities as scientific authorities.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Owledge

[zanshin]

Not necessarily bad to study correlation, I think the university scientists understand it's not conclusive and doesn't show causation. The media and public are the ones who make that sort of leap. So much importance given to science and research, helpful to understand how it should work properly. Old example from statistics class was ice cream sales and violent rape are highly correlated, of course neither causes the other.

 

This study could open gates to other studies. Seems like a no-brainer to us that eating nutritious food and regular exercise make help mildly depressed people feel better, but if you want insurance companies and wellness programs everything must be proven and shown mathematically to work. So the next step might be to randomly assign mildly depressed people to a group with healthy meals and nutritional counseling, maybe you could have an exercise group and a meditation and stress management group, the control group could get conventional talk therapy to see if people might get better just from getting some attention (placebo effect). Then, the researchers could analyze the data and if significant result, make some justification for wellness programs of some sort- maybe instead of giving people pills with side effects to pop. Which probably won't happen anyway, since nutrition, exercises and meditation don't have bankrolls like big pharma.

 

On the roll of no-brainer studies that we already could have guessed. OSU just did a big study that showed it's better for the environment to just leave wetlands alone, rather than manage, reclaim or rebuild them.

[Thunder_Gooch]

It's also linked with Chicken Nugget Withdrawal Syndrome:

 

[Owledge]

It's also linked with Chicken Nugget Withdrawal Syndrome:

I just remembered how when I was in the USA and wanted to order at the drive through on foot, late at night, they told me they are not allowed to serve 'walkers'. I can only assume that it's because people on foot could attack the employees and climb through the window.

 

Hmmmm...

Edited April 3, 2012 by Owledge

[zanshin]

I think it's liability, walker could get hit by a car. I was told no walkers once too. So we got a shopping cart from the market and my friend pushed me through in it. The guy working laughed and gave us some food.

[Owledge]

Haha, very skillful problem solving!