Scientists can use different types of experiments to test hypotheses. The rickets experiment just described is called a laboratory experiment, as it was done in the confines of a lab. In the fields of nutrition and health, laboratory experiments are often conducted using animals, such as rats. Research conducted with humans is usually observational or experimental.

Observational Research

Observational research involves looking at factors in two or more groups of subjects to see if there is a relationship to a certain disease or another health outcome. For example, researchers might study rates of breast-feeding in infants with and without rickets, to see if breast-feeding influences the incidence of the disease.

One type of observational research is epidemiological research, which looks at populations of people. For example, scientists may look at people who live in Norway and notice that there is a higher incidence of rickets among children there than in Australia. Through their observation, they may find a relationship between the lack of sun exposure in Norway and the high incidence of rickets there compared with sunny Australia. However, the scientists can’t rule out the possibility that the difference in the incidence of rickets in these two populations may also be due to other factors in the subjects’ diet or lifestyle.

Experimental Research

Experimental research involves at least two groups of subjects.  One group, the experimental group, is given a specific treatment, and another group, the control group, isn’t. For instance, after hypothesizing that vitamin D cures rickets, scientists would have randomly assigned children with rickets to two groups. They would have given the children in the experimental group a vitamin D supplement but would have given the children in the control group a substance, called a placebo that looked just like the vitamin D supplement but contained only sugar or some other nonnative ingredient. If neither of the two groups of subjects knew which substance they received, then they were “blind” to the treatment. If the scientists who were giving the placebo and the vitamin D supplement also couldn’t distinguish between the two treatments and didn’t know which group received which, this would be called a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

The scientists would also have to make sure that all other significant factors were the same for both groups during the experiment. For example, since the scientists knew that sun exposure has a therapeutic effect on rickets, they couldn’t let the children in the control group go outside in the sunshine while keeping the children in the experimental group inside. The exposure to sunshine would change the outcome of he experiment. Similarly, they’d have to ensure that the children were eating exactly the same diet for the duration of the study.

A double-blind, placebo-controlled study is  considered  the “gold  standard” of research, because all of the factors that might influence the  study  results  are  kept  the  same  for  the groups of subjects, and neither the subjects nor the researchers are biased, as they don’t know which  group  has  received  which  treatment.

Although the results of many experiments fail to support the initial  hypotheses, a  great many  discoveries  are  made. With continuing research, one discovery  builds  upon  another.

Though it may seem frustrating when the findings of one research study dispute the results of another  from  just  a  few  months  before, even contradictory  findings  help  advance  scientific knowledge,  in  part  because  of  the  questions they raise. Why did the first study show one result and a second study something different? In tackling such questions, scientists continue to advance   our   understanding   of   the   world around us, and within us. For example, scientists  are  asking  intriguing  research  questions about  nutritional  genomics.

 The  feature  box, “What Is Nutritional Genomics?” discusses this fascinating area of nutritional science.

A Hypothesis Can Lead to a Scientific Consensus

When a hypothesis is supported by research, the results are published in peer reviewed journals. Once a theory has been developed and supported by subsequent experiments, a consensus is reached in the scientific community.

Terms:

Peer-reviewed journal – A research journal in which fellow scientists (peers) review studies to assess if they are accurate and sound before they are published.

Laboratory experiment – A scientific experiment conducted in a laboratory. Some laboratory experiments involve animals.

Observational research – Research that involves looking at factors in two or more groups of subjects to see if there is a relationship to certain outcomes.

Epidemiological research – Research that looks at populations of people; it is often observational.

Experimental research – Research involving at least two groups of subjects.

Experimental group – The group given a specific treatment.

Control group – The group given a placebo.

Placebo – A sugar pill that has no impact on the individual’s health when ingested.

Double-blind placebo-controlled study –  When the scientists and subjects in a research experiment can’t distinguish between the treatments given to the subjects and don’t know which group of subjects received which treatment.