161–170 of 537 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you find disagreeable about the My Plate that was linked?
I just told you: it's made by food industry interests and is ultimately divorced from actual nutrition science.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a confluence of various factors. Explosive population growth, for example. The modern economy (of which fiat currency plays a pivotal role) relies on that of course, as the lending system is a bet on future growth. If that fails the whole thing can enter a state of catastrophic failure. But population growth has more precedence. Fiat currency, bureaucratization, etc. were adopted as reactions to increasingly exp…
Huh, what? Population increased a lot in the 19th century, and many countries did not have fiat currencies back then; and the price level most went down slowly as the population grew. (Modern day 2%-ish stable inflation is mostly fine for the economy, even if it technically erodes the value of money in the long term. The classic pre-WW1 gold standard was also fine-ish. The Frankenstein gold standard-ish they until th…
Political evolution is spread over many years and is structurally anisotropic. Metallism's death was inevitable by the 18th century at best, but don't misunderstand that to mean it was going to happen immediately. It's also just a symptom. The enlightenment's political revolution is a manifold spread across centuries. Don't just look at the symptoms, you won't understand anything and it will lead you to half-baked conclusions.
CVD and links to saturated fats is a long, long established phenomenon and has a lot of science behind it. A single study or even studies should not invalidate or discount it. Before people misinterpret what this is saying. Sugar may also contribute some to CVD but most cardiologists still think fats are the main driver of CVD.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That doesn't seem like enough to entirely shape worldwide discourse around nutrition and sugar. People are often surprised when they find out how little people sell out for. The going rate for a member of congress in 2015 was a little less [0] - about $43,000. [0] https://truthout.org/articles/you-too-can-buy-a-congressman/
But buying off a single congressperson is not going to change the worldwide discourse on a topic.
How do you corrupt an entire government? One congressperson at a time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or maybe the combination is the problem. I couldn’t consume much sugar on its own nor much cream but put the two together in ice cream and I could eat it all day long.
That is what I came to believe as well. If sugar alone was the problem, vegans would be fat. If fat alone was the problem, ketogenic and carnivore diets wouldn't help people lose weight. It seems to be the combination of two at the same time that causes the issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's really good to ask these questions. I'm not a medial researcher, but my impression is that many fields find it difficult to produce the robust high-level risk comparisons that you ask about. I.e. if you're looking at blood fats, even there you'll find many complicated contextual factors (age, sex, ethnicity, type of lipids i.e. LDL or lp(a) or ...?). The same might be the case for sugar. So it's not really easy/…
But is it the actual sugar, or the habits surrounding consumption of the beverage?
When this news first came out it was mind blowing, but at the same time I don't entirely get it. So the money quote seems to be: > The literature review heavily criticized studies linking sucrose to heart disease, while ignoring limitations of studies investigating dietary fats. They paid a total of 2 people $50,000 (edit: in 2016 dollars). That doesn't seem like enough to entirely shape worldwide discourse around nu…
You would be astonished at how little it takes to bribe, I mean donate, to a politician for example. For as little as $10-20k USD you can get a literal seat at a table with a sitting senator or congresscritter for several hours at a "charity" dinner, with results as expected.
That industry can lobby for and basically "purchase" scientific outcomes that affect health standards should be a defcon 1 red alert. People should be lose their careers over this, at the very least imo. And the fact that people do not care is just as, if not more, concerning. This is how you get MAHA, which I support bc of this, craziness included.
why? the state does not need you to live past your retirement age. in fact, it's preferable if you don't.
A good book that explains it all is The Case Against Sugar by Gary Taubes, which came out the same year as this article. Like many truths, it's actually well-known and frequently discussed in public, but hard to hear amongst all the noise of corporate messaging and decades of bad dietary 'advice' from both public and private institutions. To paraphrase the Oracle in the Matrix: What's really going to bake your noodle…
A well placed warning label makes it a little easier to hear:
This isn't really a correct narrative. Diets high in saturated fat are correlated with CVD. Sugar is also correlated with poor metabolic health which is also correlated with CVD. Both are bad. Best data is still Mediterranean- nuts, fruits vegetables, olive or avocado oil, and lean protein.
Mediterranean diet is basically a lie, though. If you look at the healthiest Mediterranean populations, they eat a lot of saturated fat. Diets high in saturated fat are correlated with high standard of living. High standard of living is correlated with high consumption of processed foods. So... yeah.