Quote:
Originally Posted by wehateporn
If only that were true, but if it was it wouldn't have taken 40 years for us to find out that beta blockers are a waste of time. Clearly they've got a product to sell and a myth for marketing it
|
That's incorrect. Some of the the most effective scientific studies are meta-analyses. Scientists combine and contrast results from several studies. They have a higher statistical power to report findings.
Epidemiological research is also very important. It would be a researchers dream to follow a population of people with risks of heart disease over a period of 40 years. Those studies aren't as common. But they do exist.
So it's not surprising that scientists find different results 40 years later.
You suggest that garlic is helpful in the treatment and prevention of heart disease.
How much garlic should patients take every day?
How frequently? Do they need to take it once a day, or 3 times a day?
Is fresh garlic better than garlic extract tablets?
Is cooked garlic as potent as raw garlic?
There are many different reasons why people develop heart disease. Does garlic treat all those risk factors? Can it manage and reverse symptoms and damage when people are diagnosed with heart disease?
The media are notoriously bad at interpreting the findings of scientific research. That's why we read conflicting stories all the time.
'Caffeine is toxic and causes heart disease!'
'Drinking coffee every day prevents Alzheimer's!'
Your best bet is to find a good doctor, get regular physicals, and let your doctor do what they were trained to do. Most good doctors will be happy to interpret the latest research studies for you if you bring up something that concerns you.