The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
What we found in this study was that, when people thought they were consuming the high fat high calorie indulgent milkshake, in response to the shake, their ghrelin levels dropped at a three-fold rate stronger than when they thought they were consuming the sensible shake.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
you give somebody a milkshake you tell them it's a low calorie milkshake you measure things like their insulin their glucose response level levels of satiety levels of ghrelin Etc You give another group milkshake you tell them it's a high calorie shake you take all the same measures you'll see different responses vastly different responses
you give people a milkshake you tell it's a high calorie milkshake has a lot of nutrients and then you measure ghrelin secretion in the blood and ghrelin is a marker of hunger that increases the longer it's been since you've eaten and what you notice is that suppresses ghrelin to a great degree and for a long period of time you give another group a shake you tell them it's a low calorie Shake that it's got some nutrients in it but that doesn't have much fat not much sugar Etc they drink the shape less ghrelin's suppression and it's the same shape and it's the same Shake and satiety lines up with that also in that study