Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 77 posts

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#61

Post by DiabloD3 »

vikeri wrote: post #60
DiabloD3 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that an acceptable response? A hypothesis must be falsifiable for it to be valid in the first place, and saying "the Sun did it" is a valid way to falsify the hypothesis; thus you now must also prove the Sun is not affecting climate change to the degree that we have measured. No one has been able to prove this, and all evidence collected by NASA seems to indicate that the Sun is by far the largest driver of cl…

Say 97 % of doctors agree that you will die if you don't change your lifestyle. Would you not change your lifestyle even though there's a theoretical possibility that you will die irregardless? https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPYtifSVAAEly44.jpg

Those same scientists produced the data that made this possible. The same predictions they've been making since the 70s, the same ones Al Gore et al. built a financial empire on... did not come true, and are woefully wrong.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Kpr6U8FBQEM/UPRuAB8NUbI/AAAAAAAABy...

Pay attention to both scales. Did humans have greater climate change ability than we have now, in the past, but then suddenly stopped? Notice the range labeled "mini ice age" covers a time period during an extended period of abnormally low solar activity (with the Spörer and Maunder minimums happening during this period).

Edit: Also, sorry, I couldn't find better URLs for these images, Google isn't cooperating today.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#62

Post by andyfal12 »

CM30 wrote: post #2

Okay, am I the only one finding these 'Big Industry' names kind of ridiculous now? Big Pharma, yeah that works. Big Tech? Sure I guess. But calling these companies Big Cow just sounds utterly ridiculous. It just doesn't work at all.

I agree and I think it usually simplifies industries in negative light. But the dairy lobby ain't something to shrug at. I think i remember reading a while back on legislation deciding if products like almond milk can call themselves milk.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#63

Post by cropsieboss »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #51
jamesgagan wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Debunked: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19524224 "Clinical studies show no effects of soy protein or isoflavones on reproductive hormones in men: results of a meta-analysis."

Citing one study (meta analysis or not) and claiming debunked is not a serious argument, especially with respect to diet where there is data all over the place. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2721724/ There was an inverse association between soy food intake and sperm concentration that remained significant after accounting for age, abstinence time, body mass index, caffeine and alcohol intake and smokin…

Wrong measure. What if men had lower concentration of sperm but higher volume of the ejaculate? Soy is known to have benefits on prostate and much of the volume of sperm comes from prostate liquid.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#64

Post by contingencies »

borne0 wrote: post #27
nawitus wrote: post #5

I recommend eating tofu as tofu, not as a fake meat. It's delicious if you know how to prepare it.

Very true, Pad Thai without any protein aside from tofu is still delicious.

Yep. Sugar, oil and salt with a bit of crunchy veg, chilli, soft rice noodles, often egg, a touch of fish sauce and lime. Classic. Will definitely be on offer at http://8-food.com/ launch :)

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#65

Post by vikeri »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #61
vikeri wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say 97 % of doctors agree that you will die if you don't change your lifestyle. Would you not change your lifestyle even though there's a theoretical possibility that you will die irregardless? https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPYtifSVAAEly44.jpg Those same scientists produced the data that made this possible. The same predictions they've been making since the 70s, the same ones Al Gore et al. built a financial empire on... did not come true, and are woefully wrong. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Kpr6U8FBQEM/UPRuAB8NUbI/AAAAAAAABy... Pay attention to both scales. Did humans have greater climate change ability than we…

Again I'm no expert, but some Googling states that the medieval was indeed possibly hotter at some places on Earth but that this was due to difference in solar radiation and absence of vulcanic eruptions, factors that are not in play today.

On a more personal note, if a scientific consensus is not it, what kind of information would be able to convince you that man made global warming is real?

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#66

Post by rbobby »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #58
rbobby wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there's no proof that any human activity is causing the current increase in global temperatures "No proof that any" is just flat out wrong... on the level of "there's no proof that 1 + 1 always equals two".

How is that an acceptable response? A hypothesis must be falsifiable for it to be valid in the first place, and saying "the Sun did it" is a valid way to falsify the hypothesis; thus you now must also prove the Sun is not affecting climate change to the degree that we have measured. No one has been able to prove this, and all evidence collected by NASA seems to indicate that the Sun is by far the largest driver of cl…

It is an acceptable response because you are spreading falsehoods under the guise of "may not be popular here". Popularity does not determine reality... facts are facts. Your assertion of "no proof that any" is easily shown to be utterly false with a simple google search.

And now you crack out another absolute "all evidence collected by NASA" which is also just plain wrong. First NASA isn't the only group studying climate change, nor is it their primary mission. So whether or not NASA has or has not found evidence that the Sun is the largest driver is immaterial.

And again a simple Google search shows you are utterly wrong in regards the Sun being the primary driver.

Just go away.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#67

Post by mickronome »

cropsieboss wrote: post #63
WillPostForFood wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citing one study (meta analysis or not) and claiming debunked is not a serious argument, especially with respect to diet where there is data all over the place. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2721724/ There was an inverse association between soy food intake and sperm concentration that remained significant after accounting for age, abstinence time, body mass index, caffeine and alcohol intake and smokin…

Wrong measure. What if men had lower concentration of sperm but higher volume of the ejaculate? Soy is known to have benefits on prostate and much of the volume of sperm comes from prostate liquid.

Possibly wrong measure, and not the whole story in any case.

The implicitly suggested volume measure might not be the wrong measure either since fertility depends on quite a few variables, several we don't even know about.

These unknowns are actually a bit concerning on their own since fertility has been falling rapidly, at least in most of the western hemisphere, and the cause is unknown.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#68

Post by rgrieselhuber »

sn9 wrote: post #57
rgrieselhuber wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your second point is worth looking into further. Soy can be found in many products: https://www.verywell.com/food-and-ingredients-to-avoid-on-a-...

Presence isn't really the an indicator of amount.

Prevelance is.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#69

Post by cropsieboss »

mickronome wrote: post #67
cropsieboss wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong measure. What if men had lower concentration of sperm but higher volume of the ejaculate? Soy is known to have benefits on prostate and much of the volume of sperm comes from prostate liquid.

Possibly wrong measure, and not the whole story in any case. The implicitly suggested volume measure might not be the wrong measure either since fertility depends on quite a few variables, several we don't even know about. These unknowns are actually a bit concerning on their own since fertility has been falling rapidly, at least in most of the western hemisphere, and the cause is unknown.

Well, Asia does not seem to suffer yet soy is a significant part of their caloric intake.

Re: Can protein startups and their investors take on Big Cow?

#70

Post by nawitus »

hnnsj wrote: post #31
nawitus wrote: post #5

I recommend eating tofu as tofu, not as a fake meat. It's delicious if you know how to prepare it.

What's wrong with eating fake meat if that's what you like?

Nothing, and I do. It's just odd when I see tofu recommended as a "fake meat".
Post reply on HN