11–20 of 248 posts
So perhaps NPR views this as "disappointing" but the headline suggests broadly that everyone should stop taking those supplements, when in fact the results are far more nuanced.
HN's absurd title policy is using a clickbait (and misleading) title chosen by NPR and amplifying it.
Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.
I don't see it as lunacy. Some chemicals we put into our bodies kill us, some cure our illnesses, some keep us awake or put us to sleep. It's lunacy to believe that some can benefit our health?
Regardless, this isn't zero-sum. I don't think people are advocating for a pill to replace diet and exercise, but it seems obviously worthwhile to pursue other avenues of living a healthy life.
Been taking 10k IU of D3 for a few months now, managed to get my measurement from the teens or 20s into the 90s of whatever unit that's in. I believe 100 is the max of the healthy range. Can't tell the difference, but allegedly you're going to feel "worse" if you're low on this stuff. It would be amusing to find out that it actually makes no difference at all and it's all placebo.
Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.
Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.
Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.
Been taking 10k IU of D3 for a few months now, managed to get my measurement from the teens or 20s into the 90s of whatever unit that's in. I believe 100 is the max of the healthy range. Can't tell the difference, but allegedly you're going to feel "worse" if you're low on this stuff. It would be amusing to find out that it actually makes no difference at all and it's all placebo.
Been taking 10k IU of D3 for a few months now, managed to get my measurement from the teens or 20s into the 90s of whatever unit that's in. I believe 100 is the max of the healthy range. Can't tell the difference, but allegedly you're going to feel "worse" if you're low on this stuff. It would be amusing to find out that it actually makes no difference at all and it's all placebo.
Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.
Why do we keep looking for some magic pill and ignore diet and exercise, especially when we talk about cancer and cardiovascular disease? Expecting a pill to counteract a sedentary lifestyle and a diet high in sugar and carbs is lunacy.
Diet and exercise have considerably higher costs than pills. Seems like that should be apparent. I don't see it as lunacy. Some chemicals we put into our bodies kill us, some cure our illnesses, some keep us awake or put us to sleep. It's lunacy to believe that some can benefit our health? Regardless, this isn't zero-sum. I don't think people are advocating for a pill to replace diet and exercise, but it seems obviou…