I am not sure if you're entirely familiar with how science works?
The study has a fairly large effect size, there's plenty of other research into body chronology that shows similar effects and differences between people. The methods in the study look solid, as does the analysis. There's also nothing weird with how the interpreted the results.
Now, should you go out and alter health guidelines for an entire country based off of one study? Hell no. But that also does not mean that you dismiss the study.
Research funding does NOT work in such a way, that scientist A comes up with an interesting idea and immediately gets funding to recruit 200 000 participants from 20 countries.
Comments
I am not sure if you're entirely familiar with how science works?
The study has a fairly large effect size, there's plenty of other research into body chronology that shows similar effects and differences between people. The methods in the study look solid, as does the analysis. There's also nothing weird with how the interpreted the results.
Now, should you go out and alter health guidelines for an entire country based off of one study? Hell no. But that also does not mean that you dismiss the study.
Research funding does NOT work in such a way, that scientist A comes up with an interesting idea and immediately gets funding to recruit 200 000 participants from 20 countries.
134 is a pathetically small sample size
In excercise science many of the studies are based on 20-30 college aged male athletes. 134 is a bigger sample than many.