Great News! Alzheimer's breakthrough hailed as 'turning point'

[Orrex]

145. Nope.

First, you complained about no studies.

Then people posted about studies.

So you raised the bar and said they had to be longitudinal studies.

Then people posted about longitudinal studies.

But you figured you could shoot it down by claiming that they weren't very big longitudinal studies.

I'm sorry to tell you this, but you're either flat-out lying or else entirely incorrect.

Here's Duer 157099's Reply #63: "Two words: twin studies"

In my reply #65 I asked if they were largescale longitudinal studies. You assert that I was moving the goalposts, but that's simply not the case. Rather than changing the requirements as you claim, I set the standard in a single subject line. How can you not see this?

Your own reply #120 stated "Yes, longitudinal studies, a famous one being with nuns."

So you met half of the clearly stated criteria, and then you complain that I changed my requirements? Bullshit. Further, 678 participants is not a largescale study. It's a preposterously tiny sample, and in this case a sample entirely of women with nearly identical diet and lifestyle.

That's simply not adequate for making assertions about the best course of action for the population as a whole.

In the meantime, "no shit", exercise and diet do help lots of people.

Again, no shit, and now you're using a straw man. At no time have I ever asserted that exercise and diet don't help lots of people. Instead, I have asserted--correctly--that diet and exercise do not verifiably delay, prevent, or ameliorate the onset of Alzheimer's. By broadening the assertion from "people with Alzheimer's" to "lots of people," you are positing an argument that I have not made.

Why should I defend your own argument for you?

Seems like analysis paralysis to me.

Seems like you don't know what you're talking about. You certainly don't understand what I'm talking about, or at least you're not replying to it.