HN Explorer

9 comments

[ 0.18 ms ] story [ 12.2 ms ] thread
upheaval7276
this article is garbage, likely just written by AI without any proofreading. so many things in the article are wrong after reading the study a bit. for example, study says 73 people, article says 64. Article says only part of the participants were in a caloric deficit. Study says "All participants followed a diet plan aligned with the American Heart Association's macronutrient recommendations (55% carbohydrate, 15% protein, 30% fat) to induce a modest energy deficit of approximately 300–500 kcal/day.". etc, etc

skip the article, read the study at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15502783.2026.2...

nonsensical_
You will consume slop on HN and you will be happy.
wnissen
You may be right about the article but 64 is the correct number:

    64 completed week 12 and were included in the repeated-measures analysis.
disgruntledphd2
Presumably they used intent to treat though, so 73 pp data were analysed.
15155
The question is: does it increase muscle nuclei or just water volume?
comrade1234
Don't you normally have about a kilo (or 500g?) excess as backup energy stored in your muscles and liver(?)? Why would taking a few dozen grams help?
stubish
Locked up and waiting for signals to release doesn't do much good.