Live data from Hacker News

For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

washingtonpost.com

41–50 of 106 posts

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#42
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find humans to be pretty funny. Modern day humans no longer trust the instincts they have developed over millions of years and instead put their faith in shitty science and corporate marketing. They no longer trust themselves to know how long to stay in the sun, how many steps to take, or what kind of foods to eat.

Those instincts were evolved to get you to reproduce and live long enough for your offspring to be self-sufficient. The world has changed enormously since the industrial revolution and there's hardly been enough time for new instincts to evolve to account for modern society.

I don't agree. The human body tells you when things are right or wrong. It is about the effects, not whether it is a new stimulus that caused those effects.

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A naive view, at best. You're forgetting all about politics and special interests. > We can't leave it to intuitions of the masses. Precisely the mindset of the power elite that gets us into so much trouble.

Well, take vaccinations for example. Would you better leave it to the people to decide? I'm sure half won't take them. EDIT: I do understand the corporate influence, but we could find a way to build unbiased scientific institutions if with collective global will.

Or insurance. "I don't need that, I will never ____!"

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#45
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is somewhat unique in that there is a lot less tradition. Many "Old world" countries have millenia of established culture. How to live and eat healthy. Instead the US falls back to experimental science and corporations to define good health.

I view the "established culture" you mention as science too..based on certain observations. It's not that all traditional methods are inferior or superior. We constantly re-evaluate as we evolve.

I've just become a father and my kid has very slight jaundice, not enough to have to do anything about it. But it did get me thinking, "how was jaundice dealt with before"? Considering 10% (??) of kids have bad jaundice that's a huge evolutionary pressure to either eliminate it (by favoring kids with larger livers) or somehow deal with it.

Well my wife's (who's from a third-world and (formerly) most isolated country in the world) grandma (eldest of 13) explained it to me: She's always taken newborn's and placed them by the window for an hour. That'll do it!

Then I read the history of neonatal jaundice care and I was shocked to learn that light therapy for jaundice wasn't discovered until the 50s (when a doctor noticed that newborns under the care of a nurse with particular habits fared better) and widely practiced until the 70s!

+1 for folksy medicine!

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#46
I love whole milk. Plain and simple. It's delicious. It's got a ton of good fat and protein in it. My entire family drinks it and always has. We're all of healthy weight (my brother and I are actually pretty skinny, although he has a bit of a gut now that he's 32, I'm still 25 and because of handstands and pull ups you can see my abs a bit).

We also eat very healthy in general as a family. Lots of pasta with clam sauce, red sauce, alfredo sauce. Lots of vegetables. Avocados. Clementines.

And we all lead healthy lifestyles in regards to exercise. Lots of musical instruments being played, hiking, canoeing, walking, and biking.

So, I'm not sure what my comment is here really, but the moral of the story seems to be for me: If you eat healthy foods (and don't eat too many processed items), and if you partake in healthy activities, you'll probably end up pretty healthy.

How much of it is genes? I have no idea.

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#47
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those instincts were evolved to get you to reproduce and live long enough for your offspring to be self-sufficient. The world has changed enormously since the industrial revolution and there's hardly been enough time for new instincts to evolve to account for modern society.

I don't agree. The human body tells you when things are right or wrong. It is about the effects, not whether it is a new stimulus that caused those effects.

> The human body tells you when things are right or wrong.

The human body won't tell you to avoid lifelong tanning to avoid cancer in your 60s, because living to your 60s isn't all that evolutionarily important (and hell, likely made you a drain on your hunter-gatherer tribe). There's no selection pressure.

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#49
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, the Federal Gov't mostly follows the money. And actually we can leave people's lives up to them to lead. Whether you think their decisions are right or wrong, based on intuition, religion, science, etc., the populace aren't children and the gov't aren't parents. Freedom is the right to be wrong.

The population is largely children, and nearly 100% of the population were children when they adapted to most of their culture, (specifically the kinds of ideas you are rejecting here.) You don't think "freedom is the right to be wrong" wasn't something you were taught as a child by adults?

Yes, but they aren't the government's children.

Re: For decades, government steered millions away from whole milk. Was that wrong?

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating an emulsion, which is exactly what homogenization is, does not do anything to the molecules. It reduces the size of the clumps of molecules, which simply allows it to exist in a consistent suspension. It has no effects whatsoever on how those compounds behave in the digestive tract.

Maybe that's taking it too far? Clump size may indeed affect absorption, change the time it takes to travel down the intestine, or even change the speed of chemical reaction with increased surface area.

I have examined enough human intestines, macroscopically, microscopically, and biochemically, to feel fairly confident this is not in fact something to worry about.
Post reply on HN