381–390 of 516 posts
Is this a predominantly American thing? I've never even heard of these things used to describe food before I came to the USA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You place a burden of evidence on him that you yourself in this very post violated on a number of occasions. You CANNOT call his diet poisonous simply because you disagree with it. Nutrition science is in its infancy. It's clear that the complexity of the interaction of food as it is digested and interacting with our organism has barely had the surface scratched. Also, if you look at the rise of processed foods alo…
>Also, if you look at the rise of processed foods along with obesity, diabetes, and other health problems that have increased over the past century it's clear that there are some serious problems, and they haven't been explained conclusively by this or that macro-nutrient trend. >So given the state of the evidence, a vague evolutionary assertion that whole foods are generally healthier than a distilled diet of comple…
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/...
Isn't it well known that chemical fertilizers, pesticides, preservatives, heavy metals and other nasties do affect foods supplies through the conventional food chain? I think people who enjoy naturally grown food do so with the knowledge that they are avoiding all of this. Sure, it's not going to make a great difference over a few meals, but if you spend your life eating well rounded meals grown naturally your body is certainly going to benefit.
Secondly, I am currently under the impression that evidence of bioavailability for many supplements is pathetic to zero.
Finally, the damage that extracting, packing, shipping, storing, ordering and measuring these artificial food replacements causes to the environment (ie. the real ecosystems they are ultimately sourced from) is vastly greater than that of simply plucking a fresh tomato from the vine.
> a 24-year-old software engineer > ... > Soylent contains all of the nutritive components of a balanced diet What utter bollocks. We're (as in, scientists studying nutrition and how utterly wrong food industry has gotten that in the 20th and early 21st century) finally starting to get our collective heads around the benefits of whole foods vs. highly processed foods, and just how badly our bodies deal with the latte…
> the benefits of whole foods vs. highly processed foods, and just how badly our bodies deal with the latter This sounds like the naturalistic fallacy.
> a 24-year-old software engineer > ... > Soylent contains all of the nutritive components of a balanced diet What utter bollocks. We're (as in, scientists studying nutrition and how utterly wrong food industry has gotten that in the 20th and early 21st century) finally starting to get our collective heads around the benefits of whole foods vs. highly processed foods, and just how badly our bodies deal with the latte…
About 18 months ago I gave the Four Hour Body diet a whirl, primarily to lose weight. I was very surprised to notice that my psoriasis improved. A lot. While I was eating well. Took a stressful contract gig, resumed eating poorly, psoriasis came back with a vengeance. So I tried harder to stick the diet and my skin's health improved.
Maybe 9 months ago I saw Dr Terry Wahls TEDx talk. I thought "Aha!" I'm a software guy, not a nutritionist. And I really just want to know what I'm supposed to do, the bullet points, not really needing the details.
Since then I've tried very hard to eat like Wahls suggests. My psoriasis is now about 2/3rd gone. From bleeding breaking skin plagues back to normal skin mixed with flakiness.
I see my dermatologist next week for my yearly. I'm quite eager to see if he notices the improvement. I've been dealing with this stuff for 10+ years and have gone to great lengths to treat it. I'm a bit chagrinned (grumpy) that all I had to do is eat more vegetables.
So I believe, but cannot prove, that I lacked the proper nutrition and now that I'm eating a very diverse diet my health has improved.
It's pretty uncontroversial. I'm impressed by the commenters who take great exception to your points. Like my scientist cousin is fond of asking skeptics (e.g. creationists, climate change, economics) "What level of proof do you require?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Extraordinary claims, extraordinary proof, or GTFO." > "I see this guy's protocol as nothing but poisonous in the long run." You place a burden of evidence on him that you yourself in this very post violated on a number of occasions. You CANNOT call his diet poisonous simply because you disagree with it. You admitted it yourself: > "Current research is showing that we are only just beginning to gain understanding…
Please read this to understand: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5370816 If nobody has a right nutrition model today(1), including exeprts doing this whole life, somebody who just read a few books has no chance to cover everything that has to be covered long term. Or in other words, don't you think that military with practically infinite funds wouldn't already use his drink or equivalent for all extreme circumsta…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For anyone that doesn't understand that statement, I recommend taking a few years off work, where you spend your time getting up early every day, doing something all day (hiking, walking, gardening, building, whatever) and go to bed late in the evening (i.e. Full days of activities you want to be doing). I spent 2 years doing this [...] How did you afford this, financially? What was the before/during/after story of…
I saved for ~18 months, then spent two years driving from Alaska to Argentina, because I wanted to. I blogged the whole time at http://theroadchoseme.com All the financial details are at http://theroadchoseme.com/the-price-of-adventure You'll be interested to note I only spent $1200/mo on the road, which is almost exactly what I was spending month-to-month to go to work every day. I'm currently back working as a Soft…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Dr. Terry Wahls, "Minding Your Mitochondria": She needs some reputation management, because at the moment there's a bunch of flags that make her sound less than reputable. 1) "Mitochondra" - unless this is a peer reviewed respected journal most people using htis word are cranks. 2) TEDx - Sadly, now tainted as home of cranks. 3) Cured MS through diet - ridiculous claim etc etc.
I would appreciate it you'd elaborate on your first point about mitochondria here. I'm intrigued to find out why this term is highly suspicious. Are there other organelles that are less crank-like to you?
There are lots of drugs, for example, which are useless because although they target the right protein and have the desired effect they can't actually get to it via normal metabolism and the like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeez, man, chill out. History is littered with amateurs making breakthroughs. You're take down is uncompelling. Processing for health is a bit different from processing for cost.
> Processing for health is a bit different from processing for cost. In the sense that history is littered with people attempting to apply cross-domain knowledge to processing for health and failing utterly, that's absolutely true.