Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

smart_stable_genius_ t1_iybk01t wrote

Reply to comment by Moont1de in "Green Mediterranean diet” high in polyphenols and fiber can reduce that visceral fat. After 18 months, those subjected to the diet saw a visceral fat reduction of 14 percent; eaters of the Mediterranean Diet saw a 7 percent drop. Visceral fat among “healthy eaters” was reduced by 4.5 percent by Wagamaga

I'd rather just get the facts and not someone's interpretation of it. There's probably a science opinions subreddit for that kind of content.

1

Moont1de t1_iybkj97 wrote

> I'd rather just get the facts and not someone's interpretation of it.

OP is citing a literal conclusion to the paper.

> There's probably a science opinions subreddit for that kind of content.

The content of this thread is a scientific paper. Perhaps you might want to click on it

1

smart_stable_genius_ t1_iyblfrh wrote

It's also explicitly against community guidelines, so the post will likely - and rightfully - be removed anyway.

1

Moont1de t1_iyblkg6 wrote

I wouldn't hold my breath, it's been up for 13 hours and every single post in the front page has similar editorialization.

1

smart_stable_genius_ t1_iybl1a1 wrote

>The content of this thread is a scientific paper. Perhaps you might want to click on it

No. The content of the post is a scientific paper.

The content of the thread is the unnecessary editorialization of the content. My opinion stands.

−1

Moont1de t1_iybldfl wrote

The title of the thread contains 1 (one) editorialized sentence that accurately describes part of the results of the paper linked in the thread. The title includes 4 other sentences that are not editorialized in any way.

You're complaining about 1 (one) a sentence that is not even the opinion of OP, rather just a rewording of the authors' conclusion to make it more palatable to broad audiences.

Looking at the front page of /r/science right now, every single thread has an editorialized title to make it more accessible.

You're grasping at straws

2

smart_stable_genius_ t1_iyblsoy wrote

It's literally against the subs rules to do exactly what they did.

I'm not grasping at anything. The title of the post should be the title of the study, period. I didn't post the original complaint, so it's not just me. Nobody wants someone's swayed portrayal of what the study is about when an actual factbased title is already available and required. It's a gratuitous spin and it's unnecessary.

−2