• arrow74@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 day ago

      There seem to be problems with their study

      Here’s the first glaring one:

      the mean consumption of LNCSs was 92.1 ± 90.1 mg/d.

      What an absolutely ridiculous range of consumption for a study population.

      Also the years they were collecting this data unfortunately had a whole pandemic occur. Covid is very well documented at causing long term mental decline. I’d like to see how many of their study group had confirmed covid infectious.

      Overall I’m not saying it’s not worth further investigation, but there are far too many unknown variables that the study did not control for. Rate and frequency of consumption are huge.

      • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Wait is this ± 1 standard deviation? So basically, it’s either 0 or 180 in a binary choice?

        • arrow74@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          Basically, the fact that they allowed people consuming 2 mg and 182.2 mg into the same study group is insane.

          Also considering 1 can (12 fl oz) diet coke contains about 184 mg of aspartame, they didn’t even bother to study an interesting group. I’m sure you could find 100 people that consume at least 2 cans worth a day.

          Honestly I’m curious how someone consumes only 2mg of aspartame a day. That’s about 1 ml of diet coke