In another cringe-worthy research report, have a look at this recent paper asserting links between PFAS chemical exposure and fatty liver disease. I’m not suggesting that PFAS chemicals aren’t dangerous to health - on the contrary. But looking at their actual data, the paper’s focus becomes farcical.
Spoiler: They totally missed out on citing the diabetes, obesity, smoking, and drinking associations in lieu of a chemical link.
[Sure, the average disease risk from PFAS exposure is shown to be 4.5x… but it ranges anywhere from 1.2x (minimal) to 16.0x (massive), leaving some head scratching as to the meaningful significance of the effect. But that’s besides the point…]
The real kicker comes from looking at the OTHER differences reported between those who contracted non-alcohol fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and those who did not:
-
NAFLD DISEASE: 38% had DIABETES;
-
vs. NO LIVER DISEASE: 8% had DIABETES
-
NAFLD DISEASE: 46% were OBESE;
-
vs. NO LIVER DISEASE 16% were OBESE
-
NAFLD DISEASE: 48% were non-drinkers
-
vs. NO LIVER DISEASE: 58% were non-drinkers
-
NAFLD DISEASE: 62% were former SMOKERS
-
vs. NO LIVER DISEASE: 48% were former SMOKERS
In other words, if you are obese, have diabetes, consume alcohol, and smoke, you are more likely to develop liver disease. Why aren’t these the real key risk factors highlighted in the research on liver disease?
For your own amusement, here’s a direct link to the paper:
https://www.jhep-reports.eu/article/S2589-5559(22)00122-7/fulltext
