https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2771095 SO HOW DO YOU LOSE WEIGHT!! FASTING DOESN’T WORK or so says this study titled- Effects of Time-Restricted Eating on Weight Loss and Other Metabolic Parameters in Women and Men With Overweight and ObesityThe TREAT Randomized Clinical Trial 100 overweight or obese adults were randomized to regular eating or to a restricted eating pattern where you could not eat between 8pm and 12 noon and the result were no statistical difference between the group that at three meals a day and the group that could only eat between 12 and 8. Here is the problem- People could eat anything You basically are only restricting breakfast. What grown adult eats a ton for breakfast. I mean sure there aer some but the majority of people I know maybe have a hard boiled egg or a piece of toast but never a huge meal. How many EXTRA calories are these people really getting?? I think a better way to do this trial would have been 12 hours of fast but make the hours 5am to 5pm or some random time frame in which you limit the person to not eating for TWO meals, breakfast and lunch. DON’T say hey you can only eat between 12 and 8 because that means that they can eat lunch and dinner. This is a poorly done study and I wouldn’t be so fast to throw out time restriction eating I think there is still plenty of data saying it can and does work but one should be aware this study is out there. A good magic trick makes you think one thing when something else is going on and I often wonder how often that happens in medicine, like I seen in this article https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2771506?guestAccessKey=5cac67ed-13a3-4b78-b201-61c95f31bec9&utm_source=silverchair&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=article_alert-jamainternalmedicine&utm_content=olf&utm_term=100520 Early Noninvasive Cardiac Testing After Emergency Department Evaluation for Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome Which was a retrospective study using data from kaiser permanente looking to find if noninvasive cardiac testing (NIT) after an emergency department (ED) evaluation for acute coronary syndrome lowered the 30 day risk of death or acute myocardial infarction??? Sure a patient comes in for chest pain and the recommendations are for noninvasive cardiac testing within 72 hours but what is the evidence for this?? Do follow up stress ECG, stress echocardiogram, stress myocardial perfusion, or a coronary CT angiogram actually make a difference??? The result they give is like magic—they found noninvasive testing lead to improvements at 30days with The number needed to treat was 250 to avoid 1 death or MI, 500 to avoid 1 death, 333 to avoid 1 MI, and 200 to avoid 1 major adverse cardiovascular event within 30 days. BUT was it the test that made a difference?? because this is where the magic happens. There was no difference in the rates of revascularization procedures. So people have more test but they are not then having subsequent revascularization procedure. LIKELY something else is going on?? Like what you ask?? A good PCP and medical optimization – those that had the noninvasive extra test had stastically higher rates of antihyperlipidemics (16.1% vs 9.7%; P s review of new data from three clinical trials, warning was added to the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor in 2017 after several studies found an increased risk for lower-limb amputation. The FDA says that recent studies have found a lower amputation risk than previous studies — especially when patients were monitored — although the risk is still elevated. recent study in The BMJ titled Risk of amputation with canagliflozin across categories of age and cardiovascular risk in three US nationwide databases: cohort study – in which Patients newly prescribed canagliflozin were propensity score matched