[ExI] Gout and meat adaptations

[Harvey Newstrom]

Dave Sill wrote,
> On Apr 20, 2011 4:36 PM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
wrote:
> >
> > That study is outdated.  It only found a correlation.  But correlation
> > is not causation.  Follow-up experiments to test actual causation showed
> > that increased fructose intake does not increase uric acid or cause
> > gout.  <http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/7/1/16>.
> 
> Seriously? The author of that paper is a full-time employee of Archer
Daniels Midland.

Yes.  And he did a wonderful job establishing correlation and proposing a
hypothesis.  But that's not a conclusion, according to the scientific
method.  The scientific method requires hypotheses to be tested
experimentally.  When we did that, we determined that fructose intake does
not raise uric acid levels.

This in no way detracts from this guy's career.  He did good science.  It's
just that you shouldn't be referencing his intermediate correlations or
hypothesis while ignoring the experimental results.  By doing so, you are
referring to outdated data when later date further along the scientific
sequence is available.

So if you don't agree with my representation of the scientific method,
steps, and conclusion, enlighten me.  What sequence of steps did you use to
determine that the original hypothesis is correct and the experimental test
of it was incorrect?  Because you are clearly implying that I am somehow
mistaken.  But you have not clearly articulated any reason why.