This display with regularly-rotating high-quality pencil art could be a neat business. The comparison to wall art makes the hardware price look more reasonable, and you could offer a subscription to curated pieces or a network of artists' output.
Agree that it's a poor headline and that the fructose/Alzheimer's hypothesis is quite speculative, but I don't think calling it a "junk study" or gesturing at evidence hierarchies is particularly helpful.
Theory (almost) always precedes evidence, and coming up with a novel, biologically-plausible explanation for a common ailment is absolutely a valid, useful scientific contribution.
Your general point, that drawing firm conclusions would be radically premature, is spot on. I just stiffen up a bit when I encounter "RCT or GTFO" type arguments; where in the world do you think the ideas for which RCT to run come from?
YMMV, but I recommend more people try High Intensity Training (HIT). HIT explicitly contradicts several of the (well-supported) claims in the article, but I've personally found it effective, and I think there's a good case that it's a better fit for most adult lifestyles.
[ETA: Just to clarify, HIT is different from the more widely-known HIIT. This wikipedia article[1] is a good introduction, and the book "Body By Science" is an excellent deeper dive.]
I'm a 40-ish male with a long history of resistance training, and have tried many variations of sets/reps/volume/rest etc over the years.
For a few years now I've been doing a version of HIT, basically single sets (to failure), no (or little) rest between sets, full-body training once a week, supervised by a trainer. It sucks, but it's over quickly.
It's great. I'm significantly stronger than I've been in many years, have remained injury-free throughout (rare for me), and play competitive basketball several times a week without issue (beyond my inconsistent shooting).
The article cites its sources, has solid (for exercise science) evidence backing its claims, and is pretty convincing - if you're a college student with plenty of time, and you're seeking to maximize muscle growth, then yes there's a good case that you should do several workouts a week with more rest between sets.
However, if you're a working stiff who just wants to get it done efficiently, HIT is much easier to fit in a busy schedule. I think it's worth considering for the median person reading fitness articles on HN.
For most people, I suspect HIT is essentially just as effective as the type of protocol advocated in the article, but that's just a hunch and not a claim I could support with anything beyond personal experience.
This was a while ago, but IIRC there were some fairly major software-reliability rough edges (frequent crashing/bugs/etc). Beyond that the major shortcoming was that it was constrained to pdf's only, and that's only one part of my reading workflow.
For a while I was trying to sync a Zotero library (since I need citation management when writing papers), and do all my academic reading (which is mostly pdf's) in Polar, but it was just a bit too much overhead to stick with.
https://getpolarized.io/ seems like it's in the same space - it's a product I wanted to love, but was a bit clunky to use and didn't end up sticking in my workflow.
Very interesting observation, my own experience with GJP, metaculous, and other betting fora agree with this.
I wonder if an HN-like forum with prediction at its core would have legs? I always found the best comments in prediction tournaments at least as interesting as the actual estimates, but none of the platforms really support back-and-forth conversation.
I think it would be valuable, I've actually had this idea (but not the competence/bandwidth to actually build it, alas).
It could become a platform for courses built around SRS, or learning materials like Michael Nielsen's mnemonic media: https://numinous.productions/ttft/ .
Testing resources are in short supply, so testing is being performed to guide clinical decisions (ie sick people) rather than public health/science (ie random sample).
The handful of serosurveys that have been performed have been quite valuable, but there aren't nearly enough.
Hopefully this changes as testing capacity ramps up.