← Back to context

Comment by ltbarcly3

5 hours ago

Yea, but you are just accepting AI slop.

Here is your first example, "corrected": https://share.gemini.google/DCSLT4PPap5q

Having an AI do a quick check of research studies is about as effective as just trusting a Vogue magazine article. You are just fooling yourself into thinking there is something useful there, there is not.

Well OP is asking about a specific paper and you are asking for it to be disproven, different requests and the LLM is just doing what you want.

Classic "you're holding it wrong" (maybe enhanced by exercise/nutrition science being what it is with a study and expert representing every side of an argument)

I'd personally probably do it like

> Someone told me about a recent paper which showed that sleep deprivation had surprisingly little impact on muscle hypertrophy, and that mechanical stimulus seemed to be the dominant factor.

> Can you comprehensively fact-check this, and let me know what the general scientific consensus on the topic is?

Even then you can't be certain of course. Even reading the cited studies you can't be certain unless you know enough to interpret them. But you'll probably be a bit more informed than you would be if you were just going off news article titles you see on social media like the average person.