• Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    So the research was pointless because we can’t tell the difference without a control group. Further research needed.

    • LordMayor@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      That doesn’t make it pointless.

      There is something to be learned from this. Using a control would answer a different question.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Using a control group would tell us if there’s any gain from the supplements whatsoever, was basically my point. For the average person using supplements doesn’t do much for weight gain as far as I hear, so that’s why I was asking what kind of people these subjects were, if they were athletes or regular people doing weight training. So, it does matter.

        • LordMayor@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          16 hours ago

          And, my point is that calling this research pointless is just wrong because it answers à different question.

          I’m not disagreeing that the question that you want answered should be studied. It should. But, the fact that this research doesn’t answer your question doesn’t make it pointless.

          It’s perfectly valid research to study whether the results are different between animal-based and plant-based supplements. I didn’t go through the citations but they say:

          Recent evidence suggests that both animal and plant proteins support strength and hypertrophy gains when paired with resistance training and adequate protein intake

          which sounds like the research you’re asking for has already been done.