Although our editors are awesome they are really picky on what they pass through to the enhanceable community. Why? Because we want to gain the trust of our readership by curating only the highest quality content. Think of our editorial staff as your own personal force field. Protecting you from all of the crazy stuff happening in the wild west of health and fitness media. Here are their guidelines and expectations to all submitted posts to enhanceables-
-High resolution photos
-High resolution videos
-No grammar or spelling errors
It gets really annoying when we hear “science” contradict itself. One day coffee is a superfood and another day coffee promotes heart attacks. We need to know which science to ignore and which to follow, here are our guidelines-
-Data and claims backed by research w/ proper citing
-Observational studies used for developing hypotheses only (not cause and effect)
-Observational finds are backed with consistent trails and can be replicated
Questions to ask yourself-
1. Is a relative change (like percentages) being used to convince?
Explained: “PEOPLE WHO DRINK COFFEE LOSE 20% MORE FAT THAN THOSE WHO DON’T”
Is 20% actually impressive? Relative increases or decreases can be misleading and unsafe. Lets break this down further. 20% more fat lost could be the difference between .24 lb and .30 lb. In reality drinking more coffee and submitting your body to high doses of coffee may not be worth the .06 lb difference. I guess you can decide if its worth it…
2. Is this an observational study claiming to show cause and effect?
Explained: Observational studies cannot predict cause and effect claims because you can not properly control variables. Drawing unwarranted cause and effect conclusions from observational studies is the bread and butter of media or financially driven “science”. Run away from articles that make bogus claims like “SUGAR-FREE – LOSE 10 LBS A WEEK NOW”.
3. Does this study depend on self-reporting or surveys?
Explained: Can you even reminder what you ate last Wednesday for dinner? It is really hard to account for events that happened in the past. Avoid studies that depend on after-the-fact self reporting. Trust your own data just be sure that you are stickler in jotting down whatever your are self-reporting (as they happen).
4. Is this diet study claiming a control group?
Explained: In certain experiments like diet studies it is impossible to have a control group and control just one macronutrient (fats, proteins, carbohydrates). For example, you can’t say that a low carbohydrate diet is the result of a fat loss since if you limit carbohydrates you then have to increase both fats and proteins. So it is then inconclusive as to what created the fat loss, is it the increase of fats, proteins, or both?
5. Do the funders of the study have a vested interest in a certain outcome of the experiment?
Example: Is a sugar experiment funded by a cereal or soda company? hmmm… I wonder what they will find?
Please beware of relationships between scientists and the people who fund their science.
Experienced based posts-
1. Please do not make claims if your sample size is of 1 (yourself…)
2. Can you create repeatable results?
3. Are you practicing with in your scope of experience or knowledge base (aka do you have credentials or experience to warrant your claims?)
Cooking recipe posts-
1. Many of us are not Bobby Flay, please keep all recipes to an easy skill level.
2. Less than 10 ingredients (try and limit the number of exotic ingredients).
3. Ensure that all recipes are clearly labeled if they meet specific dietary needs- gluten free, vegetarian, paleo, etc.
4. No added sugar