This is getting tiresome.
The study/thesis is here: http://gupea.ub.gu.se/dspace/bitstre...77_21446_1.pdf
My husband told me about some latest study he saw in JAMA yesterday that said eating soy reduces risk of breast cancer. Must have been done on mice! He's been teetering on the fence about Primal and studies like these sure aren't helping.
keep in mind i didn't read this yet but i wanted to chime in with a few words. i work with mice and rats daily in a research setting so i felt it appropriate to not only emphasize the pros of animal research but more importantly to emphasize the cons in studies like this.
1. is this academic or industry research?
-motivating factors (to cure disease or to put a band-aid on symptoms from big pharma?)
2. limiting funds factor
-how well tested are these studies?
-what are the n's in the study? is this 6 animals or a large pool of animals showing statistically significant findings?
3. how reproducible are the findings?
-did the publisher do the experiment at least 2x?
4. is it published by a reputable peer reviewed journal?
5. are these mice predisposed to obesity issues and disease already? i've worked with db/db mice (type II diabetics) who are obese and eat hi fat breeder chow. Conversely, I also deal with ins2akita mice (type I) (it's a single point mutation in 1 AA that causes beta cell destruction in the pancreas) and these mice are thin and eat the EXACT same hi fat breeder chow. ok maybe i need to read the article now
i could go on but these kind of "findings" passed around online always make me cringe until i see other people publishing similar results. often, other labs may try to replicate the findings only to fall short of the "extreme pathology" or have no change at all when compared to a newly published paper.