81–90 of 158 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is the big area big data analysis will end up revolutionising. The only problem is really getting reliable data into the system. Sensors in your mouth (probably in the teeth) are more obvious - sensors at the other end might be a harder sell. And what goes for nutrition will work for drug interaction monitoring too.
What if the sensors are inside the toilet?
I'm a medical student who actually read the paper this article refers to. I would be very careful trying to draw conclusions from a study like this. I don't think many people in the healthcare community would be very surprised by it. 1) All clinically treated hypertensive patients were excluded - that means if you have kidney or vascular disease (hypertension) and are being treated for it, you aren't counted here. Do…
Number 3 is very interesting. I understand why the press would make silly claims. But why would medical doctors apply those claims to normal people? Assuming they're not generally considered valid for those who are healthy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty good, but not as good as it could be. There's no disputing the fact that we're better off if most of our carb macros don't come from refined flours and sugars, that we shouldn't eat trans-fats, and that we should eat a lot more fresh produce than most people do. I like Michael Pollan's often quoted statment: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”
Should have stopped at "Eat food. Not too much." Mostly plants is fine, but so is mostly lean meat and some plants.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the population is carb intolerant. Unable to process sugar, their kidney turns it into fat and makes them feel starved at the same time. When they try to follow a balanced diet with lots of carbs, they get fatter and fatter. They try to consume less calories and they starve while creating new fat stores at the same time. For these people calorie calculation is the wrong thing. They should stop sugar consumpti…
Unable to process sugar, their kidney turns it into fat Kidneys do not turn sugar into fat. restrict carbs to a minimum and without a diet they will slowly lose the weight That is a diet. They will lose weight if they consume fewer calories than they spend. This nonsense is a great example of the awful ideas that people have about dietary science, and how poorly the truth is being communicated.
Make fat feel guilty about their weight and get them to continue eating sugar and corn syrup has only made the epidemic bigger in the last decades.
Take Omega3 for example: It´s much healthier to reduce the content of Omega 6 in your diet than popping a couple of Omega 3 pills a day. This is so because our current diet has screwed up this optimal ratio [1]
Same applies to salt: The problem is not Sodium, but refined salt, that has a mineral composition so unbalanced that makes Sodium problematic.
Just eat unprocessed food.
[1] Optimal ratio Omega6/Omega3=around 1. Typical ratio in western diets: 15/1 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0753332202...
Did they really prove there was 'no association' or did they just fail to reject the null hypothesis that there is no association? These are diabolically different things!
Think about what proving no association actually means. That would require proof of a negative, which is a widely recognized logical error, an impossible burden. To see why, imagine that I believe in Bigfoot and I will continue to believe until someone proves he doesn't exist. But no one can prove Bigfoot isn't hiding under some rock on a faraway planet, therefore I am justified in my belief. My belief is supported by an impossible evidentiary burden.
This is why scientists rely on the null hypothesis -- contradicting it requires positive evidence. Its opposite requires negative evidence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that energy burned is not by any means a 1:1 correlation with exercised performed. We are inefficient machines, and our efficiency characteristics vary wildly in ways we don't fully understand. Two people consuming the same quantity of energy and exerting the same number of joules on exercise equipment do not see identical or even necessarily related physiological effects. There are many, many factors - other…
while that may be true, for the mast majority of people that over simplification is fine. The high odds are that the fat person running next to me on the tread mill is over weight because they eat too much and do not move enough, not because of the 10 calories per hour I may burn in that work out due to what ever factors. if it were a small % of overweight people you might have a point, but the high % of overweight p…
You say that like genetics has nothing to do with whether someone will stick to a diet or not ;)
Did they really prove there was 'no association' or did they just fail to reject the null hypothesis that there is no association? These are diabolically different things!