Scientific Data Analysis – My Philosophy
As a scientist turned Personal Health Advisor and Educator, I often delve into the scientific aspects of various health topics. In this article, I would like to do something a little different and share my philosophy on scientific data analysis related to lifestyle factors. My philosophy often differs from others in the field.
Recently, a study on the sugar substitute erythritol was published, and I shared this study on my social media accounts.
My recommendation was to avoid consumption of erythritol for the time being because there is data to suggest it may cause adverse cardiovascular events. However, a physician that I respect greatly, Dr. Peter Attia, posted the opposite on his social media accounts. This difference of opinion led me to reflect on my philosophy of interpreting scientific data related to lifestyle factors.
Less risk!
While Dr. Attia is correct in his conclusion that the data presented in the erythritol study was only corollary, and does not provide 100% certainty of increased cardiovascular risk, our recommendations on consumption differ. I believe that less weight of evidence is required to make lifestyle changes because they usually come with very low risk. After all, what risk do you assume if you stop eating erythritol? In contrast, if the study was on a therapeutic intervention for a disease, stopping the drug would not be recommended, as the evidence supporting the intervention would need to be much stronger. The risk is much higher here. What could happen if you stopped using the therapeutic intervention? Your disease may worsen, you may have complications, or you may die. These are too great a risk.
In the case of erythritol, it is a sugar substitute that none of us needs to eat and has safer alternatives. The risk of stopping consumption is minimal, whereas the potential risk of increased cardiovascular events is higher. Thus, I am willing to reduce or eliminate erythritol from my diet until stronger evidence is available supporting its safety.
My philosophy is that simple lifestyle factors with little risk, such as changing diet or exercise, need only have moderate strength of data supporting or refuting them. In contrast, therapeutic interventions for diseases should have substantial and strong data behind them.
Agree to diagree
Ultimately, Dr. Attia and I agree on the data presented in the study, but we differ in our philosophy on what level of data should support a lifestyle intervention. I hope this article provides a different perspective on interpreting scientific data for health and wellness and why my recommendations may sometimes seem at odds with others.
Until next time, stay well!
Dr. Tobi