Recent comments in /f/science

True_Garen OP t1_jeday1w wrote

Background: The relationship between vitamin intake and depression has attracted increasing attention. However, several studies examining such relationship among populations at different age groups have produced inconsistent findings. This study was aimed to investigate the cross-sectional association between vitamin K intake and depressive symptoms in US adults.

Methods: We used the data from a nationally representative sample of 11,687 adults from the 2013 to 2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Vitamin K intake was assessed by the 24-h dietary recall at the first day. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Logistic regression and generalized additive model were used to examine the association between vitamin K intake and depressive symptoms.

Results: The weighted prevalence of depressive symptoms was 10.2% (8.0% in men and 12.0% in women). We observed a significant inverse linear relationship between vitamin K intake and depressive symptoms in models adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, marital status, educational status, family poverty income ratio (PIR), home status, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, physical activity, sleep disorders, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes. The odds ratios (OR) (95% CI) for the highest compared with the lowest quartile of vitamin K intake was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.52, 0.89, p-trend < 0.05). The association was similar in subgroups stratified by age, sex, race/ethnicity, marital status, educational status, PIR, home status, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, sleep disorders, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes.

Conclusion: Vitamin K intake was inversely and independently associated with the odds of depressive symptoms in the US adults. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

1

AutoModerator t1_jedavar wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

McBleezy8 t1_jed95z1 wrote

You can do many things to control blood sugar and to lower cholesterol not just cannabis so it’s not strictly some sort of panacea, but research shows it can help.

What confuses me about what you wrote is basically the idea that some kind of conspiracy exists to deny adolescents cannabis. There have been studies on the affects of cannabis on the adolescent brain for example This one from 2011 shows differences in brain tissue integrity following heavier marijuana use does predict future risky behaviors such as increased marijuana use and aggressive and delinquent behaviors many observational studies in humans imply a link between teen marijuana use and poor outcomes but are clouded by several potential confounding variables, such as socioeconomic circumstances or family mental health history. There does need to be more research but I doubt the conclusion will ever be “it’s so beneficial we recommend all children between 13-17 take it.” It’s always better to err on the side of caution and wait until their adults and brain has fully developed.

14

Mikey6304 t1_jed77to wrote

Just because it has effective medical use for adults does not mean it is perfectly safe and fine for adolescents. Delta9 THC is still psychoactive. There is a reason they don't sell SSRIs over the counter, too. Don't get me wrong, I use sublingual cbd/thc myself, but I'm not going to pretend that there isn't a possibility that using a psychoactive could have a negative effect on the brain.

26

Brain_Hawk t1_jed625v wrote

Ok, so first, I think Frontiers is trash. I am very biased against them. Disclosure : )

Where the heck is this 70K coming from? The consort shows 42k, and only 11k included, and 860 with depression.

So the REAL important sample size is 860 with depression. Compared to 10k without... but the focus on odds ratio may alleviate the sample size difference problems.

Also t he depressed and non depressed groups differ on almost EVERYTHING. So why the focus on this diet effect. They have different BMI, blood pressure, age, gender. You can't necessary jsut 'covary' those out. They could have run a sensitivity analysis limiting that 10k non depressed people to a sample matched across other variables. There are challenges here too but... would have strengthen the results.

Lastly, the measure of depression is weak at best, and not at all diagnostic. But that's very typically a challenge of cohort studies.

Some interesting findings maybe, but if I had to rate it (I don't but I'm gonna), C+.

EDIT PS: Seriously, where the hell does that 70k in the abstract come from? Seems so deceptive to me!

1

ahfoo t1_jed40lq wrote

Notice that these well known beneficial effects on blood sugar, blood pressure, pulse and gut health from cannabis are always left out when discussing whether or not there is genuine harm in adolescent cannabis use. When it comes to adolescent use, the razor sharp focus is strictly on changes that take place in the brain while the beneficial effects on the rest of the body are ignored.

If cannabis use is beneficial for the health of adults, why are we to believe there is some special case with adolescents that causes them to be harmed by this otherwise beneficial therapeutic with generalized benefits to health?

−8