Ah yes you're quoting the same silly website that you used for the glutamine debate, before I posted hundreds of studies from Harvard Medical School and other prominent centers of medical and scientific research which proved you were wrong. Not only this, but in that last debate you even admitted that you didn't bother reading any of the articles!
I'm no expert, I can only analyse articles as well as you; by reading the abstracts and I'm not going to do that because it's ineffective. Thus I get my information from trusted experts, not by being an armchair scientist.
Here's what you said last time I posted scientific studies to counter the false information you get at internet websites:
Do you remember that? Because I certainly do. How much more valid and important scientific information are you now refusing to read?
And coincidentally, your internet website's "metanalysis of ALL the studies" didn't include any of the 150 + studies I linked to. But then again, I don't know why I continue to debate a 20 year old kid who gets all his information from an internet website and some guy who has absolutely zero medical and scientific credentials.
And your's are?
But anyway, here we go again:
As long as you continue to live on the word of guys like Alan Aragon you will continue to regurgitate inaccurate information. Apparently you don't even realize that Alan Aragon is not a scientist and in fact, he does not have any scientific or medical credentials whatsoever. He's just another guy who blogs and writes about topics, sometimes erroneously as he himself has admitted. Another thing: when intermittent fasting first appeared he also said it was bs. But I myself have tried it and have obtained extraordinary results, as have some of my friends and hundreds of people who post on the IF threads at bodybuilding.com. Actors such as Hugh Jackman and Brad Pitt have gone on record stating that they have used IF
And lots of anabolics in Jackman's case, additionally Pitt's physique has never been anything impressive. What kind of proof is this anyway? to obtain their most impressive movie role physiques. Above all, vast mounds of scientific studies are now coming out praising IF for its positive effects on health. And as long as you continue to receive your erroneous information from inaccurate sources like Alan Aragon and an internet website like examine.com, you will continue to propagate inaccurate information. The thing with Alan Aragon is, that at least he can admit when he is wrong (as he did with IF). But you, obviously, cannot.
LOL:crackup:, this is fvcking hilarious. I like IF, not because there's any hard science behind it (there isn't and that's what Alan has pointed out, it's all conjecture) but because it makes cutting easier, plain and simple. Totally off-topic though
So moving on, you say there's only one study but the strange thing is that's not what I found:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23601452
This link is broken, how handy. I found the study however (through examine no less), participants used a mixture that contained raspberry ketones, not in isolation. In that mixture, there were other known fat burners like capsaicin and caffeine. So known fat burners were more effective than placebo? Fvcking crazy. Proves nothing about raspberry ketones
^ In this 8 week study, 70 obese participants were given either a placebo or a supplement containing raspberry ketones, but both groups were placed under the same regimen of exercise and a calorie restricted diet.
The participants given the raspberry ketone lost 7.8% of their fat mass, compared with the placebo group which lost only 2.8%.
So what this study shows is that taking raspberry ketones may not be a miracle cure for obesity and you can't just eat a bunch of fatty foods, then take some ketones and expect to lose weight. But what it does show is that when combined with a healthy diet and exercise, it leads to greater fat loss than diet and exercise alone. Which is exactly what its use is for.
Then there's
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20425690
This is an in-vitro study, and thus utterly useless for our purposes. Turmeric kills cancer cells in-vitro, it sure as hell doesn't kill cancer in humans; go figure.
which concluded that
"An immunoassay showed that RK increased both the expression and the secretion of adiponectin, an adipocytokine mainly expressed and secreted by adipose tissue. In addition, treatment with 10 µM of RK increased the fatty acid oxidation and suppressed lipid accumulation in 3T3-L1 adipocytes. These findings suggest that RK holds great promise as an herbal medicine since its biological activities alter the lipid metabolism in 3T3-L1 adipocytes."
In other words, when researchers took isolated fat cells and made them grow in a test tube, adding raspberry ketones to the mix had two effects:
1. It increased lipolysis (breakdown of fat), primarily by making the cells more sensitive to the effects of the fat burning hormone norepinephrine.
2. It made the fat cells release more of the hormone adiponectin, which is involved in regulating glucose levels and breaking down fat.
Thin people have much higher levels of adiponectin than people who are overweight and the levels of the hormone increase when people lose weight
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12611609
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18378021
These two studies are meaningless alongside an in-vitro trial. Find an actual human trial which shows significant increase in such compounds
So now I'm "cherrypicking" scientific studies to support a position? I guess this is what you call me posting studies performed at medical schools such as Harvard and Stanford to support my position, whereas you use internet websites such as examine.com to support yours.
Exactly, posting specific studies that have abstracts which support your bullsh1t claims. Find me one decent meta that comes close to any claims like this, I couldn't find one that supports your position. Single studies are useless, they need to be repeated.
