> the quest to create catchy and superficial YT videos can have more dramatic consequences

Did you watch the video or have familiarity with the person who made it? Because, I don't find that to be a fair assessment.

I have read lots of primary sources in health and nutrition science. The Eric Berg videos I've seen generally present the material accurately, in the cases I'm able to judge.

>  why there are so many problematic empirical studies. Too many cofounding variables.

They are also often poor empiricists. Most of our examples of poorly identified studies (other than econ ones) that we discuss in econometrics courses come from health and medicine. Despite the importance of doing so, they receive basically no training in addressing endogeneity problems.

Undisciplined

Science is often boring and not easy to follow, without a clear and simple narrative. That's probably also why there are so many problematic empirical studies. Too many cofounding variables.

Tbh, deepdown, I agree... i prefer reading a quanta magazine article on a topic I am not familiar with than the original article. More catchy, with a clear narrative, and gives me the illusion of understanding some abstract math.

But for health-related topics, the quest to create catchy and superficial YT videos can have more dramatic consequences.

HealthAndFitness

science

How Cholesterol Was Made Scary

Science is often boring and not easy to follow, without a clear and simple narrative. That's probably also why there are so many problematic empirical studies. Too many cofounding variables.

Tbh, deepdown, I agree... i prefer reading a quanta magazine article on a topic I am not familiar with than the original article. More catchy, with a clear narrative, and gives me the illusion of understanding some abstract math.

But for health-related topics, the quest to create catchy and superficial YT videos can have more dramatic consequences.