Of all of the research-related activities I’ve done, short of actual research, peer-review is the activity I do the most, and the one that I’ve been doing the longest. I regularly review for three publications (i.e. I’m in their rota somewhere), and get sporadic requests from others (usually because I’m one of the references.) My perspective on peer-review differs from most. It’s not to say that I’m against it or that I have a better idea; but that as with all processes in science, the imperfections are worth knowing because the devil lies in those details.
Read more →
I saw this abstract in my Facebook feed, and when I saw, “randomized controlled trial” in the title, I knew I had to read it because good randomized controlled trials in fitness and nutrition are hard to come by. Let’s say that I was pleasantly surprised and excited by this one; and truthfully, that doesn’t happen that often.
Before we talk about the study, I think it’s important to differentiate between “high-protein” diets and “low-something else” diets. “High protein” means that the first maconutrient of importance is protein and when figuring how much carb and fat to eat, the calories not taken up by protein are then taken up by the other two macronutrients. “Low something-else” means that the first macronutrient taken into consideration is the “something else” (these days it’s usually carbohydrate), and then the rest is available for fat and protein. This doesn’t mean that a low-carb diet is automatically a “high protein” one, or, more importantly, that a “high protein” diet is automatically a low-carb one.
Read more →