Its oh so quiet Shh Shh

[Stefan-A]

There are articles and then there is living proof.

The articles have proper methodology and absence of eg. confirmation bias. What does "living proof" have?

[EasternGirl]

I live with a child that I watch ingest sugar and then get hyper over and over again....now, you can call that confirmation bias if you want...but I have had my child come home from other people's houses hyper not understanding why, only to find out that he ate or drank something with sugar in it. I have also been trained in research and I know that unless I see the population used for a particular study, and I also see a list of the extraneous variables that were eliminated from the study, I am not convinced that a study is valid and reliable. Granted, many studies have been conducted on this particular subject...which would lead one to believe that the findings are in fact valid...however, if you show me twenty articles saying that research has been done to prove the sky is actually orange and not blue, and I walk outside tomorrow and see a blue sky, I don't really give a rat's anus what research is telling me..no matter how valid it is. I know my child. No amount of research can tell me I am wrong about what I know to be true about what I have experienced with him.

[Chulio]

I see the Husbandry section. I am a widow and was looking for the Wifedry section

[guidofatherof5]

Oh, you're going to fit in very nicely here.

[ssssnakeluvr]

Lol!!!

[Stefan-A]

, if you show me twenty articles saying that research has been done to prove the sky is actually orange and not blue, and I walk outside tomorrow and see a blue sky, I don't really give a rat's anus what research is telling me..no matter how valid it is.

How can you justify that?

I know my child. No amount of research can tell me I am wrong about what I know to be true about what I have experienced with him.

Because it's entirely inconceivable that you don't know him (the finer details of his brain chemistry) as well as you think you do. Got it.

[EasternGirl]

Stefan, I don't actually have to justify anything. I believe what I believe. You can argue with me about this forever but I am still going to believe what I am going to believe. It is entirely conceivable that I don't know the finer details of his brain chemistry, but it is also entirely conceivable that the research that they are doing on sugar will be proven wrong in ten years. Heck, in ten years, they will probably tell us that sugar causes cancer. It's also entirely conceivable that given that I am educated and trained as a psychologist and a researcher that I do know a little something about research and the fact that just because something has supposedly been scientifically proven doesn't mean that it is in fact true...especially when you are talking about the brain and things that cannot actually be measured physically. You cannot give someone a blood test and definitively measure levels of hyperactivity...it is in that sense, a subjective measure of a construct. You can measure physiological response to sugar intake...but that is not actually the same thing as measuring hyperactivity since hyperactivity is a psychological disorder. Psychological disorders can not be physically measured...they can only be subjectively measured by the person measuring them. Therefore, while one researcher may view a child who has ingested sugar to appear hyperactive, another researcher may view that child to appear "normal". There is bias on the researchers part as well. It also depends on what they are viewing as hyperactive. Like I said before, I would have to look at all aspects of a study before I deemed it valid and reliable. But again, if I think my child has a sensitivity to sugar, no study is going to make me believe otherwise. Now, I am willing to believe that my son could be sensitive to sugar for reasons other than sugar making children hyper...but, I am not willing to believe that it does not affect him if I see that it does. I also believe we are probably boring other members with this conversation at this point.

[Stefan-A]

Stefan, I don't actually have to justify anything.

You should still be able to justify it, even if there's no obligation.

You can argue with me about this forever but I am still going to believe what I am going to believe.

I have a problem with that mentality. Doesn't it matter to you whether what believe is actually true? It's not a matter of opinion, so "it's true for me" doesn't apply here.

it is also entirely conceivable that the research that they are doing on sugar will be proven wrong in ten years.

It's improbable and when the best available evidence points to sugar not causing hyperactivity, why stick with an idea that's basically unsupported and hoping that it will one day be shown to be true?

just because something has supposedly been scientifically proven doesn't mean that it is in fact true...

It's still far more likely to be true, than a wild guess based on a sample size of 1, where the researcher is biased and there is no methodology implemented at all.

especially when you are talking about the brain and things that cannot actually be measured physically. You cannot give someone a blood test and definitively measure levels of hyperactivity...it is in that sense, a subjective measure of a construct. You can measure physiological response to sugar intake...but that is not actually the same thing as measuring hyperactivity since hyperactivity is a psychological disorder. Psychological disorders can not be physically measured...they can only be subjectively measured by the person measuring them.

Even if it is to some extent subjective, they do follow test procedures and produce replicable, predictable results. And as far as I can tell, several methods have been developed that do allow you to measure hyperactivity physically.

Therefore, while one researcher may view a child who has ingested sugar to appear hyperactive, another researcher may view that child to appear "normal".

Using what set of test procedures? The ADHD diagnosis wasn't been made purely subjectively, either.

There is bias on the researchers part as well. It also depends on what they are viewing as hyperactive.

Not really, that's what the procedures and controls are for, respectively.

But again, if I think my child has a sensitivity to sugar, no study is going to make me believe otherwise.

Noted, but definitely not respected.

I also believe we are probably boring other members with this conversation at this point.

Probably, but the right way to end the conversation wouldn't be with closing statements, this issue should either resolved or the conversation terminated. Personally, I'd rather see it resolved, but if you want me to just drop it, just say the words. I'm not saying any of this in the capacity of a moderator.

[kimbosaur]

I think a lot of it is also that sugary junk foods often contain other things that your son could be reacting to. Like, caffeine in coke, and chocolate.

For instance, I'm pretty sure most parents would say that kids would "react" to drinking a can of Coca-Cola. At the same time, they'd probably be a lot less hesitant to give their kids the same amount of Minute Maid 100% Orange Juice. But when you look at the Nutrition Facts, they contain almost the same amount of sugar!

[EasternGirl]

I don't let my son have caffeine. Well, correction...I do not let him have caffeinated drinks...I do let him have chocolate. But I am talking about times when he eats sugary things without caffeine in them. Well, what exactly would resolve this issue for you Stefan? It sounds to me like the only way it is going to be resolved is for me to say that I believe that all of the studies are valid and reliable and that I am wrong about my son and that he is not reacting to sugar. I'm simply not going to say that because that is not what I believe. That is why I am saying that we can continue to argue about this but I am going to continue to believe that my son is affected by sugar...you may not respect that, but it is what I think. Now, I respect what you believe. But I am not going to say that I think you are correct...if that is what you want...because I do not think you are correct in this instance. Normally, I do agree with you with what you are saying about scientific evidence. I understand scientific methodology and I support empirical findings. I just don't think that these findings are holding true to what I have witnessed with my child concerning sugar. My justification of my reasoning lies in the fact that I simply have found no other explanation for my son becoming hyper other than the ingestion of sugar...I have done my own little "studies", so to speak...I have spent considerable time researching this, watching him, watching what he ingests, what he doesn't ingest. Do you think I haven't questioned that I could be wrong about this...when I myself previously held the belief that sugar did not affect children's behavior? Of course I have. But time and time again, I, and other members of my family, have seen my son become hyper after ingesting too much sugar. Therefore, I believe it affects his behavior.