We all know that marijuana is a popular recreational drug- and that it’s also got a variety of medicinal uses, including reducing nausea and boosting appetite. But what, exactly is marijuana - and how does it affect the appetite and digestive system?
The answer to that first question is pretty simple, so let’s start with that. The term ‘marijuana’ refers to several plants in the cannabis genus, including sativa, indica, and ruderalis.
Doctors typically prescribe marijuana to treat inflammatory, gastrointestinal, and cognitive ailments. Marijuana is also frequently administered to cancer patients, since it helps ease the pain associated with chemotherapy while increasing the patient’s appetite. This is why marijuana is used in an effort to minimize weight loss, which could lead to further health complications.
As you can imagine, this increase in appetite is one of marijuana’s most well-known effects, you might refer to it as “the munchies”. In fact, historical sources confirm that people as early as 300 BCE knew that cannabis stimulates appetite, and noted how these cravings were for sweet and savory food. Let’s dig into why that happens.
One of the main active ingredients in marijuana - a chemical compound known as tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) - is one of the main culprits responsible for “the munchies”. Once the marijuana is consumed (normally by smoking), THC activates a receptor called cannabinoid receptor type 1 (CB1), which helps increase appetite. CB1 is also involved with the receptor for ghrelin, a hormone that contributes to an increase in the sensation of hunger.
CB1 receptors appear in a variety of different areas of the body. In each of these areas, these CB1 receptors act in slightly different ways - and many of those effects help increase the desire to eat. CB1 receptors are found in all of the following areas:
Researchers have found that inhaling cannabis is also associated with lower levels of peptide tyrosine tyrosine (PYY), a peptide that contributes to appetite suppression. People who use marijuana recreationally tend to have increased levels of ghrelin and decreased levels of PYY, which may be one reason why their daily caloric intake tends to be greater.
Studies have also shown that a person’s method of THC consumption (oral capsules, smoke inhalation, or suppository) can influence their food choice, as well as their overall food consumption. For example, study participants who took a suppository consumed significantly more calories throughout the day than participants who took an oral capsule.
Recent research on CB1 has revealed that a synthetic form of THC (dronabinol) can activate a subset of neurons called proopiomelanocortin neurons (POMC). Though POMC are usually responsible for the feeling of fullness after a meal, these neurons can either release hormones that suppress hunger, or hormones that increase appetite. When CB1 is activated, these hormones prevent POMC from suppressing hunger, and enable it to start increasing your appetite.
Since activating the CB1 receptor contributes to an increase in appetite, blocking it has the opposite effect. Studies on individual cells show that blocking CB1 receptors significantly increases production of adiponectin, a hormone with anti-inflammatory effects and a negative correlation with obesity.
Researchers have also used compounds that can block the CB1 receptor - which are known as endocannabinoid antagonists - to treat obesity associated with eating disorders, which is characterized by compulsive binge eating or cravings for sweets and snacks. Animal studies show that rats given rimonabant, an endocannabinoid antagonist anti-obesity drug, experience weight loss and reduced levels of blood insulin.
Still, a lot more research is needed before we can start recommending these kinds of therapies to human patients. The CB1 drug Rimonabant, for example, failed to earn approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) - and it’s no longer sold in Europe either, due to side effects associated with its use, which include severe depression and suicidal thoughts. Since CB1 receptors are found all throughout the body, it is difficult to pinpoint the cause of these side effects.
Future endocannabinoid antagonists, however, may play a role in treating obesity by blocking CB1 receptors, increasing adiponectin production, and reducing appetite.
Marijuana has been a part of our society longer than any one civilization, and researchers continue to paint a more complete picture of the compound with every passing year. Follow-up studies will not only need to investigate CB1’s effects throughout the body, but also the different ways THC functions when ingested in various ways. More research on marijuana may also lead to breakthroughs in the fight against obesity because of how effective manipulating hunger can be when it comes to controlling our daily caloric consumption.
However, we want to end this post with a reminder that marijuana use impacts more than just your appetite. If you’re curious, click here to learn more about the health benefits and risks of marijuana.
The Examine.com page on Copper has been completed and our researchers have turned up some interesting results in the process.
The body needs dietary copper for cognitive development during infancy, as well as for optimal immune and bone health.
Too much copper, however, has been linked to Alzheimer’s disease progression. That doesn’t mean copper causes Alzheimer’s disease. Instead, some people appear to have a genetic predisposition to Alzheimer’s disease, which causes copper to harm neurons. Too much copper increases the damage done to neurons in these people.
Copper is abundant in developed countries, where it is found in most food, as well as drinking water. Copper deficiencies in otherwise healthy adults are unheard of, so supplementing copper to prevent a deficiency is not a good idea.
Although copper does play a structural role in the makeup of a potent antioxidant enzyme, Cu,Zn,-superoxide dismutase (SOD1), supplementing copper does not result in increased antioxidant defense. There is no evidence to support the benefits of oral copper supplementation.
Though copper is an important part of a healthy diet, supplementing copper offers no practical benefit. Since too much copper can have negative health effects for older people, copper is not recommended for supplementation.
Every month, it seems like there's always a new diet drink or artificial sweetener popping up in our grocery aisles, claiming that it not only offers all the benefits of its nonfat predecessors, but it also comes with none of the downsides. Meanwhile, it’s hard to avoid the reports that claim to link various artificial sweeteners to weight gain, cancer, and other dangerous effects. So how can you separate fact from fiction?
The most common non-caloric artificial sweeteners (NAS) are substances with a very intense sweet taste. They’re used in small amounts to replace the sweetness of a much higher amount of sugar, or of other derivative substances.
You’ll probably recognize at least some of the following names of common artificial sweeteners:
But are any of these sweeteners really any better than the others --or perhaps, riskier? Let’s break down what the actual research has to say.
The main benefit of artificial sweeteners (or non-nutritive sweeteners) is to provide a zero-calorie alternative to foods and beverages, while still giving them a sweet taste. Replacing refined sugar with artificial sweeteners in your own diet can be an effective way to lower your calorie intake - which can allow you to bring in some healthier higher-calorie foods instead. Some studies have found that this kind of adjustment can help obesity, diabetes mellitus, and similar problems.
The truth is that only a few artificial sweeteners have been studied in-depth: aspartame, sucralose, acesulfame-K and saccharin. The majority of existing clinical and lab data only cover these sweeteners.
The FDA first approved aspartame in 1974, in light of a large amount of evidence - from labs and clinics in the United States, as well as from more than 90 other countries around the world - that demonstrated its safety for human consumption. So why did people get so paranoid about aspartame? Most likely because of a few studies on rodents, which have found that exposure to aspartame is associated with various cancers in rats and mice.
However, experiments have shown that the doses of aspartame required to pose danger to humans are far larger than what any normal person could consume in a day. The FDA has set the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for aspartame at 50 mg/kg of bodyweight - the equivalent of a whopping 18 to 19 cans of diet soda.
Rodent studies have shown a dose-dependent increase in lymphomas, leukemias, and transitional renal cell tumors in rats and mice who received doses of aspartame lower than the ADI - but while rodents and humans do share some metabolic similarities, the mechanisms our bodies use to process aspartame and other relevant compounds are different from those in rats. This fact has led most researchers to conclude that a comparison between rodent and human effects would be invalid in the case of aspartame.
For people born with phenylketonuria (PKU), a rare inherited disease, aspartame can help create dangerously high levels of the naturally occurring essential amino acid phenylalanine - and there’s also some evidence pointing to a possible relationship between aspartame and migraine headaches. For most people, though, aspartame has always been perfectly safe at reasonable doses.
The human body doesn’t metabolize Ace-k at all, so it provides no calories - but it’s 200 times sweeter than table sugar. One breakdown product of ace-k is a chemical known as acetoacetamide, which is known to be toxic if consumed in very large doses - but the amounts of acetoacetamide found in spoonfuls of Ace-k are far below dangerous levels. Still, although plenty of research has found that Ace-k is safe for animals, human studies are still rare.
Although sucralose is made from sugar, the human body doesn’t recognize it as sugar, so it’s not metabolized - which means it provides no calories. Most of the sucralose we consume is excreted as waste - while another 11% to 27% of it gets absorbed into the bloodstream through the gastrointestinal tract, removed from the blood by the kidneys, and eliminated through our urine.
The acceptable daily intake (ADI) for sucralose is 5 mg/kg bodyweight per day, but the typical person’s estimated daily intake is a significantly lower 1.6 mg/kg per day. Human trials haven’t reported any significant dangerous effects for sucralose at all - but similarly to studies on aspartame, some research has found a relationship between sucralose intake and migraine headaches.
Among all the artificial sweeteners listed here, saccharine is the only one that deserves a stain on its reputation. The FDA tried to ban saccharin in 1977, in the wake of a series of animal studies that found close linkages between saccharin intake and the development of cancer in rodents. And while no study has ever shown a clear causal relationship between saccharin consumption and health risks in humans at normal doses, some studies do show a correlation between saccharine consumption and human cancer incidence.
More recently, researchers have found that saccharine can impair glucose metabolism in rodents. This has become a fairly controversial idea, though, and it’s probably the origin for the bad rap that all artificial sweeteners tend to catch.
A recent study by Suez et al. pooled evidence from animal studies to demonstrate several dangerous effects of saccharine - and those same authors also performed a study in which they administered high doses of saccharin to human subjects, then transplanted feces from two human subjects to two rodents. This transplant, the researchers found, caused some damage to the rats’ intestinal microbes, which in turn lowered their tolerance for glucose.
The news media grabbed the results of this single study and blew them out of all proportion to the facts, spawning outrageous headlines like “Diet Soda Causes Diabetes.” The truth is, a lot more research is needed to determine the effects of saccharin (and most other artificial sweeteners) on the human microbiome in vivo. For now, there’s no compelling evidence to suggest that normal doses of saccharin pose any harm to humans.
Aside from that, saccharin is nearly non-existent in today’s diet foods and beverages. Aspartame and sucralose are found all over the place - but saccharin is only found in Tab and a few other fountain drinks, and in the sweetener Sweet’N Low, where it’s present in tiny amounts. In order to match the dose that Suez et al. found to be dangerous for humans, you’d have to drink four cans of Tab, ten packets of Sweet’N Low, or fifty servings of a saccharin-containing fountain drink. So on the whole, even saccharine is a pretty low-risk sweetener.
What about the effects of artificial sweeteners on your weight-loss plans? Most short-term and long-term studies on humans have found that consuming artificial sweeteners doesn’t seem to decrease dieters’ energy intake - and randomized trials have found that people who use these sweeteners in place of refined sugar can successfully reduce both their weight and their body fat. Only been a few studies have examined the overall effects of artificial sweeteners on body weight - but every study has found reductions in weight and body fat in groups of people who use artificial sweeteners, as opposed to normal calorically dense ones.
So, should you be concerned? Maybe. Generally speaking, the only people who should be worried about artificial sweetener intake are children, pregnant women, nursing mothers, and those prone to seizures, headaches or migraines. If you don’t fall into one of those groups, then you probably shouldn’t be worried about opting for diet soda instead of regular soda.
Our eighth issue of the Examine.com Research Digest is finally out and this month we dive into gut health, vitamin K2 and yet another study on meal-timing.
June’s sneak peek breaks down a recent trial on probiotics and how it might improve cognitive reactivity.
Serious about nutrition? Subscribe now for the latest in nutrition research.
With our recent hiring call, we thought it would be useful to our readers and fans to understand exactly how we hire. With over 500 applicants, it's important we do it right.
While we are not an organization that puts a lot of weight into a resume, the resume and cover letter is important to us as it lets us understand the background a person is coming from. It is most important to us that we work with people who are well-rounded individuals and have relevant experience in the field. It's easy to say "I'm passionate about nutrition," but experience helps you understand and appreciate the nuances and nitty gritty that self-interest does not always expose.
Once we have been able to discern who the potential candidates are, we then operate on a very simple premise: show us your abilities.
We are not interested in how well someone interviews, or how amazing their resume looks, or the full sequence of credentials found after their name. We care about the work you can do.
For a copyeditor, we may give them something a researcher has recently written that needs to be cleaned up and made reader-friendly. For a researcher, we'll send over a study and say "analyze this study." A subject matter expert would be given a few documents and say "make notes on anything that stands out."
None of what we send over is written up specifically for them. We always assign actual work. So if we gave a copyeditor something to clean up, it's something we recently completed and have also cleaned up (we just have not published it). So not only is it real work, it lets us compare and contrast with the work we're already producing.
One important step we do take is that there is always a middlewoman (more specifically, Carolyn, our Director of Ops) between the applicants and the rest of our team. Carolyn then anonymizes all of the applicants so that our team that reviews the work has no clue who they are reviewing. This is our way of ensuring that we remain as unbiased as possible - no consideration for friendship, for gender, for race, for name, for anything.
We care for just the work.
Once we have received completed work, an internal team goes over the work, and judges it based on a variety of criteria, including depth, nuance, clarity, brevity, and more. Comments and concerns are also included by each team member. This information is then passed onto Carolyn and Kamal (our Director), to make the call on which applicants are still under consideration.
It is through this iterative process that we are able to select the best candidates and make sure that Examine.com continues to deliver the highest quality analysis for everyone!
We’re lucky to be in a position where we don’t have any sponsors or donors or advertisers to make happy. It’s what lets us be unbiased. Unfortunately, most people do have to worry about the influence of money.
Andy Bellatti has been raising the siren on the cosy relationship between industry and researchers for a while, and he has a must-read article (from the latest issue of our Examine.com Research Digest).
Click here to read "How the food industry spins science to fit its agenda" now.
A lot of people think food is pretty straightforward when it comes to improving how you feel. Just pick your favorite meal, maybe grab a beer or glass of wine, and go to town! Unfortunately, it’s not so simple.
A favorite meal or snack will definitely perk you up for a bit, but the effect won’t be as long-lasting, consistent, or healthy as incorporating a variety of vitamins and minerals into your regular diet. There are even some foods that have natural stress-reducing effects, making them a great way to improve mood without resorting to comfort food.
Zinc and Magnesium are both indirectly associated with improved mood. Studies show that people with depression tend to have lower magnesium levels than people without depression. Some antidepressants, like amitriptyline and sertraline, actually increase magnesium levels in red blood cells. There is animal evidence to suggest a lack of magnesium in the diet is associated with increased anxiety and symptoms of depression, but more research is needed to confirm this kind of direct relationship in people.
Bananas, dark leafy green vegetables, nuts, seeds, avocados, and dark chocolate are good sources of magnesium.
Zinc does not have an antidepressant effect by itself, but it increases the effectiveness of antidepressant effects from other food and supplements. Meat, eggs, legumes, and oysters are high in zinc.
To supplement zinc, take 25 – 30 mg a day, with a meal. Zinc supplementation does not improve mood when supplemented by people suffering from clinical depression.
Need help with your sleep? A great way to avoid feeling tired during the day is a good night's rest, but for most of us, that might be easier said than done. Chamomile (Matricaria recutita or Chamomilla recutita) has traditionally been used for its relaxing and calming effect. It is often brewed into a tea. Two double-blinded studies have shown chamomile to be effective for people struggling with anxiety and troubled sleep, though more research is needed to determine the mechanism for this effect.
Another option for fighting fatigue is supplementing with Ornithine. Ornithine is an amino acid that can alleviate fatigue associated with elevated ammonia levels. Ammonia buildup can be the result of prolonged exercise or long work hours. Several liver disorders, like hepatic encephalopathy, are also associated with high levels of ammonia.
To supplement ornithine, take 2 – 6 grams a day. People with normal ammonia levels will not benefit from ornithine supplementation.
If stress seems to be the root of your problems, supplementing Rhodiola Rosea and Ashwagandha might help. Both these supplements are adaptogen compouds. Adaptogens desensitize the body to stress before it occurs and can alleviate depression, mood swings, and irritability. More specifically, rhodiola rosea has been specifically shown to prevent and relieve burnout caused by stress. Ashwagandha is well-tested and has been shown to be effective for athletes, as well as people suffering from social anxiety.
Daily doses of 50 mg of Rhodiola rosea have been shown to be effective at fighting daily fatigue. To supplement Rhodiola rosea in preparation for a specific stressful event, take 288 – 680 mg. Do not exceed 680 mg, as higher doses have been shown to be ineffective. To supplement ashwagandha, take 300 – 500 mg, with breakfast, in preparation for a stressful day.
Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) are omega-3 fatty acids. These fatty acids are associated with a variety of health benefits, and preliminary evidence suggests treatment-resistant depression is associated with a low concentration of EPA in the brain.
Fish Oil, derived from fatty fish like salmon, sardines, tuna, mussels, and trout, is high in EPA and DHA. Fish oil supplementation has been shown to be effective at reducing symptoms of depression, specifically when taken by people suffering from major depression. People that eat a lot of fatty fish don’t need to supplement fish oil. Algae is the best alternative for vegetarians and vegans.
Tryptophan is an amino acid that the body uses to produce serotonin, a neurotransmitter responsible for maintaining mood. Low levels of serotonin are one of the contributing factors to depression. Poultry, seafood, nuts, seeds, dairy, and legumes are all good sources of tryptophan.
Another option for improving serotonin levels is supplementing 5-HTP, the precursor to serotonin. However, eating food that contains tryptophan will enable slower, more prolonged production of serotonin, compared to the rapid production associated with 5-HTP supplementation. Supplementation of tryptophan is not as effective as 5-HTP supplementation.
To supplement 5-HTP, take 300 – 500 mg a day. Do not take 5-HTP if you are taking any neurological drug or antidepressant. High levels of serotonin are very dangerous and potentially lethal.
St. John’s Wort is a well-researched herbal antidepressant, comparable in strength to pharmaceutical alternatives like tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs). Do not supplement St. John’s Wort if you are taking antidepressants like SSRIs, SNRIs, or MAOIs. St. John’s Wort increases serotonin signaling in the brain and, like 5-HTP, can result in an overdose if taken alongside medication.
Agmatine is a neurotransmitter that works synergistically to increase the effects of other antidepressant compounds, including bupropion, SSRIs, adenosine, imipramine, and folic acid. Agmatine does possess some antidepressant effects, but they are weaker than comparable reference drugs, like imipramine.
Before supplementing a compound to alleviate symptoms of depression, talk to your doctor.
Comfort foods tend to be loaded with sodium and packed with calories, without a lot of nutrients to show for them.Don’t give in to the temporary pick-me-up, no matter how tempting it is. Instead, evaluate your weekly diet to determine if you could include some additional healthy foods that will also improve your day-to-day mood.
Change your diet one step at a time. Start by adding a dark, leafy salad to your lunch, or replace burger night with fish night. As you change your diet, take note of your mood. Taking the time to track results will help you stick to your goals.
Supplementation should be the last step in a dietary overhaul. Eating better food to become a happier person is cheaper, delicious, and more effective than supplementation.
If you’re a marathoner (or training to be one), you may have noticed that many popular supplements intended to improve your physical performance, fall flat when used during endurance events. Pre-workout supplements and stimulants, for example, don’t work because a marathon typically lasts longer than the stimulant itself, leaving you crashing mid race. Even Creatine, a supplement used to improve physical performance, is counterproductive because it results in temporary water weight gain, which makes running harder.
Carbohydrate supplements however, are far more effective than traditional physical performance enhancers. Gel packs, or energy gels, are ideal for improving marathon performance because they are easy to ingest during a race.
So what makes gel packs so effective? Runners talk about eating a big bowl of pasta the night before a race because “carb-loading” is a good way to increase glycogen levels. A lot of glycogen is used in the first 10 minutes of exercise, and the rate of glycogen use falls until it is depleted altogether.
Have you ever ‘hit the wall’ during a marathon?
Glycogen depletion is responsible for that feeling. Eating a lot of carbohydrates the night before might delay the wall, but it won’t necessarily prevent it altogether. This is why energy gels are an ideal way to get mid-race carbohydrates. They are dense and viscous, which reduces the risk of intestinal upset, even during exercise. Plus, they’re light and portable, which means you can carry them with you or easily snag a few from an aid station. Just don’t forget to properly dispose of the wrapper!
A recent study investigated whether energy gel supplementation in the middle of a race can help delay or prevent hitting the wall during a marathon. Researchers split non-elite marathon runners into two groups. One group was provided energy gels containing 20 grams of carbohydrates and 30 milligrams of caffeine (equivalent to one cup of tea), and were told to eat two before the race, one when they believed they had hit the wall, and another every 20 minutes afterward. The runners in the second group were left to fend for themselves. Researchers also monitored the water intake of both groups.
The results show that the energy gel group was able to maintain its speed throughout the marathon, while the control group began to drop off around the halfway point. Though both groups were running at about the same speed at the beginning of the marathon, researchers found significant differences at the last three checkpoints of the race, beginning at the 18 mile mark.
The runners supplementing energy gels averaged a completion time of 3:38.31 while the control group had an average completion time of 3:49.26. Energy gel supplementation was found to improve time by just over 10 minutes, or by about 5%.
Runners having trouble with energy levels or anxious about hitting ‘the wall’ for the first time can consider energy gel supplementation to improve their time and avoid getting hit by a ton of bricks.
Never try anything for the first time during a race. If energy gels sound right for you, try taking one or two during a long training run. You don’t want to find out gels disagree with you when you’re lining up at the starting line.
Do you remember how you felt after your very first cup of coffee (ever)? Excitement and a remarkable ability to focus...Sometimes, even euphoria. Compare that with the slightly less-sleepy feeling you get after the fifth cup of coffee this morning. So, what happened since that first, magical sip?
Found in tea and coffee, caffeine is the world’s most popular stimulant. We usually associate a cup of coffee with happiness, and for some of us, even relief. Unfortunately, only people who aren’t used to caffeine will experience the euphoric effects associated with that cup of liquid gold. Chances are, if you’re a coffee-lover, you’ll only experience caffeine’s anti-sleep effect, and not much else.
And before you reach for that second cup, remember, caffeine tolerance is an insurmountable tolerance. This means more, doesn’t necessarily mean better. Increasing the amount of caffeine you consume will not amplify the effects of caffeine, no matter how much coffee you drink.
So the question is, are you considered caffeine tolerant? The ‘bad news’ is, just drinking coffee more than a few times a week will increase your caffeine tolerance, which means no super-focus and no euphoria. If you want to maximize the benefits of caffeine, you may want to try weaning yourself off of it or excluding it from your diet for a month, which will allow your tolerance to fade.
Caffeine blocks a subset of adenosine receptors called A2A receptors. These receptors are normally responsible for the sleepy feeling that signals you to get ready for bed, but when caffeine blocks this receptor, that sleepy feeling disappears. Blocking this receptor also augments dopamine signaling, which results in the stimulated feeling associated with caffeine.
Caffeine tolerance prevents augmented dopamine signaling, which is why coffee veterans don’t feel true stimulation after drinking a few cups. Even the most enthusiastic coffee drinker however, will benefit from the anti-sleep effect caused by blocked adenosine receptors.
For many of us, grabbing that hot cup of coffee or tea in the morning, has become almost instinctual. It doesn’t just taste great, it also helps us kick off that lingering feeling of fatigue after a poor night’s sleep. But just in case you need another excuse to drink coffee, here are two more science-backed reasons to justify each sip:
Caffeine increases catecholamine signaling (adrenaline and dopamine) in the body, which doesn’t just make you feel good, but also increases motivation and improves focus. Just like how supplementing Creatine alongside exercise improves exercise performance, supplementing caffeine while studying will improve retention and focus.
A caffeine dose of 400 – 600 mg is one of the most reliable and potent ways to temporarily increase strength through supplementation. People who are caffeine naive will typically experience improved power output during strength training or anaerobic exercise.
Caffeine can also play a role in recovery post-workout, whether you’re caffeine naive or caffeine tolerant. Ingesting caffeine alongside carbohydrates can improve the rate of glycogen replenishment, which is particularly important if you work out very frequently or multiple times per day.
How do you maximize the benefits of caffeine? Drink less. Or to be even more specific, less frequently. It may be difficult, but capping off your caffeine intake to once or twice a week is the best way to get more from each cup.
Having turned four years old last month, and with over a million people visiting us every month, it's time for us to expand our team to make sure we remain your best resource on unbiased information on supplementation and nutrition.
These are all part time positions, but essential to our workflow and great as learning opportunities.
We're looking for additional members to join our research team. The team includes members with a variety of backgrounds, from those with dietetics degrees to biomedical PhDs to those with doctorates in pharmacy. Researchers work with the most nitty gritty details of research, and must be intimately familiar with interpreting and evaluating peer-reviewed articles on nutrition and supplementation.
Copyeditors help translate research into reader-friendly writing. A high level of curiosity and interest in nutrition and supplementation is an asset, and experience as a copyeditor is a prerequisite. The ideal candidate would have enough coursework in science to understand concepts that we cover, in addition to at least a couple years of copyediting experience, preferably with a college or graduate degree in writing as well.
This position is mainly for those with advanced degrees and experience. Reviewers provide an additional layer of expertise for the information we put out, making sure that we don't miss essential points and are as accurate as possible. They should have broad knowledge as well as formal research experience.