zlacker

>>giulio+(OP)
> Yogurt rose the most, followed by fresh fruit, nutrition bars and meat snacks.

I would guess that this is because people are replacing full-blown meals with smaller snacks. The meat snacks is probably because people are warned about losing muscle mass. Perhaps this affects yogurt consumption as well.

> Notably, about one-third of users stopped taking the medication during the study period.

This seems pretty high considering they're only following people for 6 months. I guess people are most likely to have side effects at the beginning, but I feel like I've not gotten the sense that a third of people bail within the first year, due to side effects or other reasons.

>>appare+lL2
I feel that analysing details and consequences based on the article is premature and marginal. The reduction of 5-8% of medication using households is barely beyond measurable (we have higher variation by the season). Yet they use the words 'striking', 'steep'. Also saying 'clear changes' in one part then admitting 'the reduction becomes smaller over time' (without specifics this time). The highest decrease of 10% for savory snacks is also modest at most (e.g. still consuming 9 pack instead of 10 in a reference period. having nothing good to watch on TV might have higher effect).

The data might really be useful for the food industry once, but only after the usage of the medicine goes beyond 16% currently. 5-8% change, even 10%, for 16% of the population is tiny.

To me the study sounds desperate to project significance, using adjectives rather than data for seeking attention.