It is also clear that the original study fails to offer any causation between walnut consumption and a lowered diabetes risk. The authors do tersely point out the limitations of the study, but like Bakalar, refrain from acknowledging the validity issues with the research.
Pan et al. (2012) do mention, though, that there are several other variables at stake that could cause the walnut-eating female population to exhibit a lower risk for diabetes vs. women who consumed no walnuts. For example, the authors note that habitual nut consumption in general (not just walnuts) was "associated with several healthy lifestyle practices," (p. 516-517). Bakalar does mention that the researchers controlled for some diet and lifestyle factors such as eating fish and found that even when other factors were controlled for, walnut consumption was still linked with diabetes risk reduction. Neither...
(2012) nor Bakalar mention the fact that walnuts are relatively expensive and that income is also directly related to the incidence rates of diabetes. Such information would make the original research, and its summary article, more credible. Bakalar also fails to mention the fact that the Pan et al. (2012) study was conducted on a large but restricted sample of only white female nurses.
In spite of its limitations and the validity of the original research, Bakalar's summary remains an honest synopsis of the original Journal of Nutrition article. Bakalar spares his audience from the tediousness of analyzing raw data, which is displayed with charts in the Pan et al. (2012) study. Moreover, the mass media article offers a means by which to explore the health issues that Pan et al. (2012) address in their research: namely, that tree nut consumption is a…
