For all Jimmy Joy’s who do not know, I ate 100% Jimmy Joy for six months straight and underwent rigorous testing to see if my health would either improve or decline. I created a blogspace and youtube.com channel about the venture. I explained it a bit more under The Jimmy Joy 4 month Experiment topic within this community.
I think you are asking where is the lab results paragraph? The blood results were uploaded on the blog space as in PDF displayed forms towards the bottom of the blog space.
tl;dr is a common response on the internet when someone posts a long paragraph of text. To combat that people have started to ad a one or two sentence summary below the text.
I just read the post. Here’s my take FWIW: As a technical writer and someone who spent several years working at a biotech company and editing/reviewing case studies, this post could have provided some super valuable information but basically doesn’t quite make it as a case study for several reasons… the best we can take away is that, Jimmy Joy could potentially maintain and perhaps slightly improve an already-healthy individual, and that’s a guess as we don’t know the ground 0 state of his blood readings (at least not until the very end of the article, and then only by trying to zoom in onto his scans. I would loooove to know more about the subject’s lifestyle and nutrition choices PRIOR to Jimmy Joy!
Main criticisms:
He keeps changing his methods every 12 weeks or so.
He didn’t establish a baseline clearly in the way this is organized/laid out. Or if the data is there in the scans, the starting values should be up in the beginning. Maybe this is mainly confusing since he calls it Blood Lab Results here but really the article focuses on the variables he could measure at home, until the very end.
He didn’t establish a hypothesis. Was his previous diet super healthy? If so, then you would expect no change. Was he eating McDonald’s 4x per day? If so, you would expect values to move into a more favorable category.
He didn’t publish a conclusion, other than “the other company backed out and so I’m going to make my own meal replacement mix - hey, want in?!” …lol
The biggest problem is he randomly decides to change the tests at various points. “This time I’m going to add 8 additional supplements” (exaggeration). “This time I’m going to think about fasting.” So basically, none of the values are comparable with previous values.
TLDR version of his post: He survived on Jimmy Joy, and there was slight improvements in some areas, but nothing necessarily statistically significant.
I appreciate the critique it was very insightful and I will try to clarify any questions you had to the best of my ability.
I began the experiment with the idea of testing two things.
If long term Jimmy Joy consumption is safe.
What would happen when I reduce my sugar (mainly Sucrose and High Fructose Corn Syrup intake) greatly.
Due to the complexity of counting sugars in every day foods, (upon reading the label of a food’s ingredients) you will see just how complicated it gets to accurately keep track. With this in mind I split the consumption of sugars into two categories.
Before the experiment I was consuming more than 38 grams of sugars a day.
During the experiment I was consuming no more than 38 grams of sugars a day.
For the first three months of the experiment I ate 100% Jimmy Joy without adding any additional supplements and underwent the three month blood testing. After this point I did add the supplements mentioned in the blog space and changed the eating pattern for the duration of the second half to see if I could see any improvements of further reduced my blood glucose levels.
On average food related studies go on for between 8-12 weeks. So you could look at it like I did two experiments if you doubt the accuracy of adding in the supplements.
100% Jimmy Joy for three months straight
Jimmy Joy with a few added supplements and eating pattern changed for the later, again the idea was to focus mainly on the content of sugars so adding a couple of supplements and changed time of eating would not throw the experiment off in terms of the hypothesis to a significant extent no more than how our bodies digest anything on a given day. It always changes and is never steady in a exact way.
I averaged the sugar readings for the week because this was what I was testing for, in addition I took out the liver enzymes from the blood testing because they showed great promise. With that being said, you never want to post the most detailed data in relation of your hypothesis on the internet for everyone to see, especially if it is promising. After all the scientific community is a competitive one, let’s not forget that. If you read up in the blog I talk a lot about Dr. Robert Lustig and his lecture about sugar this was on the main reasons why I began the experiment.
Regarding the baseline readings, they are clearly laid out in the order they were taken by date chronologically and I included a link from Google Drive where you all can download a larger copy to be seen or printed out for review.
Your post about publishing a conclusion was right, but in a sense I am not done with the experiment. The second experiment where I am consuming a homemade shake is an extension of the Jimmy Joy experiment in the sense that I am still testing the lower sugar theory. This time I am consuming no more than 8 grams a day, 30 grams lower than when on Jimmy Joy.
Great clarification. Perhaps retitle to something regarding the effect of
Jimmy Joy on blood sugar, and/ or resection then? I can provide some more
specific section suggestions if you like. I’d also suggest updating the
graphs to make the titles within the graph itself more specific (in several
places you left the default titles as series 1, 2 etc but clarified with
text later on, this is a small change that would make the graphs more
substantial)
Also it’s a bit confusing that you say you aren’t going to mention
specifics at one point but yet then you publish the papers. I realize it’s
a good amount of work to polish this into what I would do as an editor, but
those are the basics I’d start with. Plus, you spent all that time
dedicated to doing it… be nice to get the data out there in a more
streamlined fashion.
agreed, =) essentially I am a very busy man. In between work, school, spending time with my fiancee and this project I am stretched with time. When I have the moment I will organize the blog space a bit better as I do see your point. I appreciate the tips and oversight in terms of organization.
@eathealthlee
I really appreciate the effort you went through to put all the details in place and be so specific with the numbers. They don’t tell me much since I don’t have that kind of back ground.
@Hannah
From a scientific point of view this would not be considered as evidence right due to the fact that he is 1 person and there are many variable at play right? Or I’m a missing something here?
What I’m trying to get at is that I get the feeling that @Hannah approaches your project as scientific. In my opinion you just went through a try out and measured specific things. That’s that. can’t really critique that (IMHO)
I also have to give you @eathealthlee credit for the fact that you inspired me to dive into a similar project. Biggest difference in approach is that I will focus mainly on the social aspects of switching to a 100% liquid diet such as Jimmy Joy. I’m really curious what it will do with my social life. This does not exclude things such as blood results and other measurable details, I think these facts are interesting regardless things as baseline and prior diet since it’s not scientific proof in the first place due to the fact that I’m doing this all by my self.
I really hope this does not sound to much like a rant or anything. I’m all open to anybodies opinion! I guess what I’m really trying to get at is the fact that scientific perception of such a (pretty impressive) project is just one way of looking at it.
Really looking forward to 2nd part of this project! Keep it up
Case studies can be individual. Most are (one client, one trial etc,
usually state what the problem was or issue trying to solve, then tells the
story, but in a more scientific way as well so supported by numbers and
such, and then concludes). Usually these also help to sell a product, but
in a less obvious “best coffee ever!” type of marketing. Case studies also
aim to not be biased. Hope this helps clarify. The author has a great base
for a solid case study here but as he mentioned, super busy and getting it
into that type of format takes work.
I am glad to hear that my experiment inspired you to create your own. =) Mine was also formed in such a fashion, after watching Dr. Lustig´s lecture on youtube.com titled ¨Sugar the bitter truth¨ I was curious of it´s application.
I am looking forward to see what the results are, the way I framed mine was geared more towards the blood lab work, physiological aspect of consuming 100% Jimmy Joy. I did not touch the psychological/social aspects of such an endeavour to in depth.
What I did was a case study of 1, meaning it had a n=1 factor. You can not really apply such results to a population i.e. larger group of people. Once you can take a larger group (known as a pilot study) (let´s say 30 people) then you can take a look at the results and see if any patterns exist. At that point you can go for a larger clinical trial which is much more expensive but is your best chance at finding out how applies to the populace in general. i.e. everyday jack and jane. To conclude with what I did was a one person case study, it´s just the factor level was not high. It´s not appropriate to look at it from such a strict point of view because it was not carried out in a lab. The idea was more what it would be like for the average everyday person who drank/ate it.
I am working on forming a pilot study with Jimmy Joy, I created a project on experiment.com which is a crowdfunding website for experiments and it was approved by the creators. At a later date I will release the project for funding. This is why I am testing a similar home made product again on my self (this time with less sugars in it) to see if I get similar results, mainly I am looking at blood sugar levels in the body and liver enzymes. The biggest difference for between a pilot study and clinical trial is the amount of money it costs with the later being much more expensive. Again the more people you have complete the experiment in the end, the higher of a chance you can apply it (your conclusion) to the general populace.
I agree with your assessment, again the idea was too see what would the results be if I was an everyday Jimmy Joy consumer. I think it´s not necessary to look at it from such a stringent point of view in terms of analysing so thoroughly. I was not done in a controlled environment but rather in everyday life.
The idea is:
Experiment 1 (Jimmy Joy)
Hypothesis: If I reduce my overall sugar consumption, will I see health improvements in my liver enzymes and blood sugar levels.
Before the experiment I was consuming over 38 grams of sugars a day (Sucrose and High Fructose Corn Syrup)
During the experiment I was consuming under 38 grams of sugars a day (Sucrose and High Fructose Corn Syrup)
Experiment 2 (homemade shake)
Hypothesis: If I reduce my overall sugar consumption, will I see health improvements in my liver enzymes and blood sugar levels.
Before the experiment I was consuming over 38 grams of sugars a day (Sucrose and High Fructose Corn Syrup)
During the experiment I was consuming under 8 grams of sugars a day (Sucrose and High Fructose Corn Syrup)
Test it on my self, get the results. Make another shake with less sugars see I if I see similar results in my blood sugar levels and liver enzymes. Then form a pilot study, test again with the two shakes and see if any patterns show up in the data. If so, move on to a clinical trial. (the big money spender, yet more applicable to the general populace.)
btw, I am curious if you could prove who you really are. As an example I am clearly Lee Primeau of Eat.Health Lee. You can find my presence all over the internet.
You simply created a presence on this blog space a few days ago, I believe your account was created very recently and said you are Hannah etc.
How do we know that you do not work for any other of the the meal replacement companies or are some way affiliated? I could create an account here on the Jimmy Joy forum and claim what ever I like…
I was responding to the person who asked me a question about studies…Haha
but I’m flattered you thought I might be a fake identity or troll. My
last name is Drake, I currently work for a health tech startup and worked
for a biotechnology robotics company before that, that works in the life
sciences space with big pharma and research universities as clients. It’s
all on LinkedIn.
Actually the summaries you just put here would be fabulous to put at the
top of your blog entry, it really “sets the stage” so to speak. But I think
likely even you would admit that the scope changed throughout the
experiment as the other company backed out, right? From my understanding it
was originally going to be between two competitors and you tried to get
more in on the project but thats as far as you got. I just ordered Jimmy Joy
the other day, after researching soylent and Jimmy Joy because I’m in the US
and most other companies are UK or Europe. I did also find blogs by others
who make their own mixes but I don’t have the time for that myself
personally! Hence why I’m purchasing or purchased.
Hey Hannah, you told me that you have experience with experiments. Let´s set some time to discuss a possibility if you are interested. My email address is eathealthlee@gmail.com.
