In this one, we delve into the relative reliability of different types of studies when it comes to exercise and/or nutrition. In particular, epidemiological studies vs RCT's when double blinded, selection biases accounted for and large enough samplings and/or times to make conclusions more or less objective.
When looking at many studies, we often only go to the "headline" and don't really check how well or poorly studies were done and whether the "headline" should be taken with however many grains of salt.
Studies can be used to sell things and either the way they are done, or how the results are communicated can lend itself to a message that is less than objective.
We also discuss the growing popularity of TRT, (testosterone replacement therapy) and some of the pros and cons.
Speaking only for myself and not Dr. McGuff, this is a trend I personally find somewhat worrisome. The pharmaceutical industry stands to make a lot of money from this and, in my opinion is very prone to emphasizing the benefits and glossing over the side effects.
Dr. McGuff points out that with any drug, how significant the therapeutic (desirable) effect, is often proportionate to how significant the side (undesirable) effects are as well.
For me, I'll just go on fighting Father Time without the aid of pharmaceutical companies because my level of trust with those entities has never been lower.
Below is link to youtube version
https://youtu.be/jgOVYP_-49g