Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site petsd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!bellcore!petrus!sabre!zeta!epsilon!gamma!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!petsd!cjh
From: cjh@petsd.UUCP (Chris Henrich)
Newsgroups: net.med
Subject: Re: Testable Hypothesis (re: Sugar)
Message-ID: <640@petsd.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 3-Sep-85 17:09:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: petsd.640
Posted: Tue Sep  3 17:09:41 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Sep-85 23:31:50 EDT
References: <1880@aecom.UUCP>
Reply-To: cjh@petsd.UUCP (Chris Henrich)
Distribution: na
Organization: Perkin-Elmer DSG, Tinton Falls, N.J.
Lines: 30
Summary: A possible flaw

[]
In article <1880@aecom.UUCP> werner@aecom.UUCP (Craig Werner) 
describes an experiment to test whether there is a general
physiological reaction to sugar.  The experimental procedure,
summarized, is as follows:
1.  The subject extends one arm, horizontally.
2.  The strength of the arm in this position is measured by
    finding how much weight it can hold.
3.  With the arm relaxed, the subject eats a small amount of
    sugar.
4.  The strength of the subject's arm is measured, again, in
    the same way.

To see how much was due to the sugar in step 3, I suggest the
following "control" experiment.  Step 3 is replaced by

3'. With the arm relaxed, the subject rests as long as it
    would take to eat a small amount of sugar.

My reasoning is that Step 2 has already fatigued the muscle
whose strength is being tested.

Regards,
Chris

--
Full-Name:  Christopher J. Henrich
UUCP:       ..!(cornell | ariel | ukc | houxz)!vax135!petsd!cjh
US Mail:    MS 313; Perkin-Elmer; 106 Apple St; Tinton Falls, NJ 07724
Phone:      (201) 758-7288