Weather and Stones

Started by danse
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

danse

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/279493.php

' Higher temperatures contribute to dehydration, which leads to a higher concentration of calcium and other minerals in the urine that promote the growth of kidney stones.'

Is it really that simple? They go on to say:

'The study team also found that very low outdoor temperatures increased the risk of kidney stones in three cities: Atlanta, Chicago and Philadelphia. The authors suggest that as frigid weather keeps people indoors more, higher indoor temperatures, changes in diet and decreased physical activity may raise their risk of kidney stones.'

Is it just a poorly conducted study?
 
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/279493.php

' Higher temperatures contribute to dehydration, which leads to a higher concentration of calcium and other minerals in the urine that promote the growth of kidney stones.'

Is it really that simple? They go on to say:

'The study team also found that very low outdoor temperatures increased the risk of kidney stones in three cities: Atlanta, Chicago and Philadelphia. The authors suggest that as frigid weather keeps people indoors more, higher indoor temperatures, changes in diet and decreased physical activity may raise their risk of kidney stones.'

Is it just a poorly conducted study?

It's not that the study itself is poor, it is that the conclusions are drawn without sufficient evidence. They set out to correlate temperature and stone rates, which they did in a reasonable fashion.

Where this breaks down is when the study creates theories that imply causation. These theories are reasonable (e.g. the heat => dehydration => stones), but they are purely speculative without evidence to back them up.