Live data from Hacker News

Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

theguardian.com

131–140 of 231 posts

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#131
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Model as in model organism, like fruit flies in genetics, or mice in biology. Lacking a model organism means we can’t do much in the way of experiments and that means we learn much slower.

They said "we still don't have a fully functional human body model", as if one was pending or expected to be developed already.

Well, I think he/she explained rather well the reason why - and the extent to which - such a thing would be useful. That plus knowing the amount of effort expended in the rest of the field of medical research today ... it is indeed surprising that nobody has bothered to even try to produce a human body model. The feat probably wouldn't even require genetic engineering. (Then again, the amount of rote concepts in biology has steered me clear away from studying it beyond a single required high-school class, so what do I know.)

My best guess is that there must be some kind of fear, among that field's practitioners, that some stupid politicians (gah, redundancy!) would take one look at the project and throw a hissy fit or worse.

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#132
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AFAIK, butter is still worse then no butter (and more calories from whole plant foods instead). Many would dispute this if you're alluding to it being heavy in saturated fat which there's heavy dispute over. > Margarine may or may not be worse than butter (I think it is worse). Doesn't seem consistent with your logic of less refined is better. > If you want to eat for health, look into WFPB, they have a lot of scie…

I see a many clear reasons to avoid/reduce any processed fat (oils, butter, etc). It is not part of what primates ate, so good chance we're not well adapted to it. It is too calorie dense. It blocks insulin. It becomes fat (carbs barely become fat), especially when combined with carbs (as is common). It often comes with cholesterol. > Doesn't seem consistent with your logic of less refined is better. That's why I con…

How does fat block insulin?

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> mainstream nutrition science was a key contributor to American obesity crisis This seems unlikely given that mainstream nutrition science is the same in most of the western world, but the obesity levels are far more severe in the US. From what I hear from friends who have travelled to the US (from the UK), standard portion sizes can be over twice as over on your side of the pond. And it can be very difficult to tra…

I think the issue stems from a holdover great depression mentality. Growing up I was taught to "clean my plate" and disciplined when I failed to do so, as wasting even a small amount of food was apparently some sort of cardinal sin despite my family being quite well off. I was also taught that eating large portions was a sign of health, an "active metabolism" (whatever the hell that is). Whenever I said I was done pe…

It's not something that would/should explain the difference between USA and, say, Europe - the exact same things you mention as a possible holdover from the great depression of 1920s are also observed elsewhere as a holdover from the generation experiencing food scarcity/rationing/starvation in WW2 and the aftermath of it; UK or Germany had food issues into the 1950s but it doesn't have the same effect on obesity as in USA.

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After doing endurance exercise 80km+ bike rides each weekend, sodium and other forms of electrolytes are incredibly important. Without them I lose fluids and I get crazy leg cramps. The issue is that salt tastes good, so people load it on their food to the point where it is unhealthy. It's the same with sugar, there is a huge industry bashing sugar at the moment, but sugar is essential for the human body. They are ba…

Given the obesity problems in the US, the low-carb/keto suggestions are effectively the same as the premature optimization/bike shedding issues with coding. If you're eating 1,000 calories too much, it doesn't matter if it's carbs or protein. Get the calories-in-calories-out balance correct, then you can start worrying about the macro nutrition afterwards. If I recall correctly, the sugar toxicity problems occur when…

This is opposite of the productive approach. The starting point should be "what diet can you eat that makes you feel satisfied after the appropriate amount of calories for your body/lifestyle".

The proportion of carbs in the diet seems to have a huge effect on appetite for many people. For them, eating fewer carbs means they are satisfied after fewer calories, so they eat less and lose weight.

If nutrition research was scientific they would have figured this out before a couple authors and random people with blogs did.

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#135
It is amazing how persistently common the 'oven logic' silliness is with medicine despite the fact that laypeople should really know better by now let alone scientists. If adequate doses of Vitamin C are good for you then megadoses must prevent cancer! Oh wait they actually increase your risk of cancer. Biological systems aren't that simple - otherwise we'd already see great results from the outliers and we don't.

It brings to mind the irony of trial lawyers becoming addicted to huge lawsuits thanks to the tobacco industry. Despite the obvious merits and misconduct of the defendants making it justified it seems to have had a harmful side effect of causing many lawyers to start looking for 'the next tobacco' case with no care to the underlying merit.

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#136
post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They said "we still don't have a fully functional human body model", as if one was pending or expected to be developed already.

Well, I think he/she explained rather well the reason why - and the extent to which - such a thing would be useful. That plus knowing the amount of effort expended in the rest of the field of medical research today ... it is indeed surprising that nobody has bothered to even try to produce a human body model. The feat probably wouldn't even require genetic engineering. (Then again, the amount of rote concepts in biol…

>"knowing the amount of effort expended in the rest of the field of medical research today ... it is indeed surprising that nobody has bothered to even try to produce a human body model. The feat probably wouldn't even require genetic engineering."

You seem to think that effort should translate into understanding. Nature doesn't work this way.

In my opinion, most effort in biomed has been wasted due to poorly designed studies, which is due to NHST (null hypothesis significance testing; ie, testing a null hypothesis rather than the research hypothesis), and all the BS that procedure entails.

So the real reason no one is trying to develop "a fully functional human body model" is that such a model is not even visible on the horizon for a single cell, or even sub-cellular organelle.

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you are like me and have mild kidney failure and your kidneys cant really dump much of anything easily! All parameters should be based on personal experimentation

As far as I remember, sodium is dumped passively. The one thing kidneys need an effort to make is to keep it at the blood, not to dump it away.

Kidney failure = your kidneys are now a clogged shower drain that also lets protein and blood go into places it shouldnt

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#138
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I think he/she explained rather well the reason why - and the extent to which - such a thing would be useful. That plus knowing the amount of effort expended in the rest of the field of medical research today ... it is indeed surprising that nobody has bothered to even try to produce a human body model. The feat probably wouldn't even require genetic engineering. (Then again, the amount of rote concepts in biol…

>"knowing the amount of effort expended in the rest of the field of medical research today ... it is indeed surprising that nobody has bothered to even try to produce a human body model. The feat probably wouldn't even require genetic engineering." You seem to think that effort should translate into understanding. Nature doesn't work this way. In my opinion, most effort in biomed has been wasted due to poorly designe…

Computational model? No. As one of the other commenters in this thread has already said: model as in model organism.

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#139
post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the obesity problems in the US, the low-carb/keto suggestions are effectively the same as the premature optimization/bike shedding issues with coding. If you're eating 1,000 calories too much, it doesn't matter if it's carbs or protein. Get the calories-in-calories-out balance correct, then you can start worrying about the macro nutrition afterwards. If I recall correctly, the sugar toxicity problems occur when…

This is opposite of the productive approach. The starting point should be "what diet can you eat that makes you feel satisfied after the appropriate amount of calories for your body/lifestyle". The proportion of carbs in the diet seems to have a huge effect on appetite for many people. For them, eating fewer carbs means they are satisfied after fewer calories, so they eat less and lose weight. If nutrition research w…

Veggies and fruit are carbs. I replaced pasta and white rice with oatmeal, cabbage and apples. All of above are all carbs. Not all carbs are equal. I feel fully satisfied with less calories now. I can eat 4 cups of rice in one sitting without realizing it, but not 4 apples. Saying replace pasta with eggs and bacon is not better than suggesting more veggies and fruits.

Regarding the approach, I found it easiest to know my goal weight has a maintenance calories of 2,100 calories - an objective, hard number. Hit that, then adjust diet for the very subjective goal of being feeling satisfied after that. I can't imagine an effective public health policy based on subjective "do you feel full?"

Re: Salt not as damaging to health as previously thought, says study

#140
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"knowing the amount of effort expended in the rest of the field of medical research today ... it is indeed surprising that nobody has bothered to even try to produce a human body model. The feat probably wouldn't even require genetic engineering." You seem to think that effort should translate into understanding. Nature doesn't work this way. In my opinion, most effort in biomed has been wasted due to poorly designe…

Computational model? No. As one of the other commenters in this thread has already said: model as in model organism.

In that case, wouldn't "a fully functional human body model" mean an artificial human, which is even harder to develop than a computational model?

Or they do exist, already. All humans are a fully functional human body model.

Post reply on HN