231–240 of 315 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s a combination of flavor and dopamine from drinking it. A lot of Diet Coke drinkers would rather drink water than Diet Pepsi. Not that it taste “bad”, it’s just not what they’re craving.
My wife stopped drinking Diet Coke for a month, and then decided she preferred life with that vice and started drinking it again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the issue isn't just the pure carb content. 100g of strawberries is a lot of strawberries. 100 g of Snickers bars is... two bars. I can easily eat two and then crave another one right away. After 100 g of strawberries, I'm pretty much done for a while. Same with say, apples. I think one thing that is usually overlooked in these discussions is the "feeling" part of it, for lack of a better term. Some things ma…
While I don’t disagree with you in general, I disagree on strawberries. 100g of them is a very small amount and a snickers bar (or in my case, some artificially sweetened protein bar) is far more filling.
Come on, this is just incomparable. Protein is satiating.
A protein bar is a very different experience from a Snickers
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, yes, replace 'sweets' with 'fruits' which are about 50-75% sugar by non-water mass. Eg strawberries - 100 g is 7.7g of carbohydrates (4.9g sugar), 0.7g protein, 0.3g fat. 56% sugar. Or oranges - 165 g without membrane or peel is 20.7g carbs (14g sugar), 1.5g protein, 0.2g fat. 63% sugar. As opposed to, say, a snickers bar. 9.1g carbohydrates (7.6g sugar), 1.1g protein, 3.6g fat. 55% sugar. Or a kitkat. 27.1g carb…
I think you've sort of lost something in your study of macros there. As an anecdote, I can eat and enjoy an orange, or a banana but typically no more. I can absolutely crush a package of oreos though. I've got a rule about junk food, that the total size of a container needs to be an appropriate single serving.. because no matter how big it is, one package has consistently been 'one serving'. I won't speculate because…
But other than that it's a very good analysis.
Is it because fruit sugar is fructose and not saccharose?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"While PTFE is stable and nontoxic at lower temperatures, it begins to deteriorate after the temperature of cookware reaches about 260 °C (500 °F), and decomposes above 350 °C (662 °F).[58] Over 400 °C (752 °F) pyrolysis occurs and more decomposition becomes significantly more rapid. The main decomposition products are tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) and difluorocarbene radicals (RCF2).[58] The degradation by-products can…
> However these cases of polymer fume fever were mostly present in people who had cooked at 390 °C (734 °F) for ≥4 hours. My oven goes up to 250 °C, though I never use it above 220. What cooking processes go to each of these thresholds?
Grills with PTFE coated utensils.
Commercial kitchens using specialized ovens and PTFE lined pans could be constantly putting out fumes.
Our propane pizza oven gets up to about 400C on the stone, and hotter at the flames. I don't think there's ever any PTFE near it, though. There do exist "non-stick" pizza peels, though, so someone could do that. The thing with peels on pizza stones is that their edges tend to grind down. I probably eat a miniscule amount of aluminum each time we make pizza.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone says this but it misses the point. Fruit in it's natural state is a complete package of nutrients, fiber, and unrefined sugar. It has less of an impact on blood sugar than processed food with the same amount of sugar.
Why? Why is “processed” automatically bad?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought oil boiled at 300 °C, how do you get up to 390 °C?
You don't, at least not on purpose. At 390 C you're filling your kitchen with smoke, and if you're cooking on gas you probably already have a grease fire on your stove. However, it is shockingly easy to get a pan this hot by accident, with no more than a few minutes of inattention. I've seen people burn the non-stick coating off their pans on a couple of occasions after getting distracted by the phone. It's risky to…
also, damaging the coating is known to lower the temperature at which PTFE will pyrolize. anecdotally i don’t think i’ve seen a single teflon pan in anyone’s home that didn’t have some damage unless it was nearly new.
most situations that people are exposed to PTFE fumes are certainly below the level that triggers acute illness, but i wouldn’t be surprised if it was very common to get enough exposure to contribute to cancer, but it would be very hard to verify or test for that specific cause.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right. That makes sense and is what I am familiar with. Is it evidence-backed as a causative mechanism? I like the Insulin Index page. That seems like reasonable evidence.
> Is it evidence-backed as a causative mechanism? My understanding of the role soluble fiber plays in fruit digestion comes entirely from talks by ucsf professor of pediatrics Robert Lustig. There's a bunch of his stuff on youtube, you may have heard of the famous one Sugar: The Bitter Truth. In some talks he goes more into the role of soluble fiber, but I don't recall which, and it's a bit of a rabbithole to go digg…
I have recently started appreciating the gut flora stuff after discovering that there’s a whole class of artificial sweeteners that not only gives me the runs (easy to handle) but also wrecks my mood (harder to detect since it borks my detection mechanism).
On the bright side, if I’m willing to accept the pain, weight loss is trivial. Smash the Nick’s and Halo Top for a week, compensate for mood with a Barry’s Bootcamp every day, come out the other side stronger and lighter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this actually evidence backed? I adore fruit. When I wanted to lose weight I had to go off fruit and substitute with diet cola. It worked really well. Ultimately, all the evidence I see points to the fact that most people can’t eat large amounts of fruit. I can, though. I’m like 170 lbs (77 kg) and I can easily devour pounds of apples or strawberries or mangoes in a sitting and eat more tomorrow. So the pro fruit…
> easily devour pounds The real problem—don't do that. Eat a salad beforehand and then keep the fruit to a serving or two. Zero doesn't work in the long term, there is no need for deprivation that squeezes out the fun in life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except mask wearing actually has scientific evidence for its effectiveness, and is why governments around the world recommend it. [1] Your rationale is based on personal bias against "artificial" substances. The same kind of quack reasoning that drives anti vaxers and other nonsense movements. [1] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2776536
Where is the science showing that artificial sweeteners are actually good for me? Or even better than natural sugars? Like I said, I don't know if artificial sweeteners are bad for me but I also don't know that they are good for me, so why use them? I don't eschew everything that might be bad for me I still enjoy wine and even the occasional slice of cake (which even if it's loaded with all-natural sugar which I am s…
lower calories?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've read that sweeteners still affect insulin levels even though they're not metabolised.
Aspartame does not increase insulin levels. People have heard that Sucralose does and group all artificial sweeteners together.
I'm gonna bet it does. Even our autonomic systems are pavlovian in conjunction, for good reason evolutionarily (hyper efficiency somewhere in the past).