Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

dynomight.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 250 posts

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#241

Post by dyauspitr »

delecti wrote: post #234
dyauspitr wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to consume a ridiculous amount of beans to get 100g of protein. That’s something like 7-8 cans of chickpeas per day.

Then don't get 100g of protein. Most people don't need anywhere near that much.

The average person is going to have a hard time getting through two cans of chickpeas, which are some of the highest almost complete protein sources when it comes to beans and legumes. As you can anecdotally see with most vegans it’s almost impossible to get the required protein using that diet. Even Indian cuisine, which is the closest humans have come to perfecting vegetarian dishes, heavily, heavily supplement with dairy products to make up the deficit.

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#242

Post by aziaziazi »

dyauspitr wrote: post #229
delecti wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The simple answer is plants. Lots of fruits and vegetables, and pulses (beans, legumes, etc) for protein.

You have to consume a ridiculous amount of beans to get 100g of protein. That’s something like 7-8 cans of chickpeas per day.

Perhaps OP is tall and big then he'll probably handle the volume. It's best to divert anyway but if one want to max out your intake with a single ingredient, Tempeh is the way to go: 15-20gr/100g. I'm a skinny guy and can eat 500gr of those in the day with ease, although it's also full of fibers and level up satiety as soon as you start digesting.

But if cheakpeas your only food source, 7/8 seems achievable. Ask the "carnivorses" that says plant left them hungry :-p

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#243

Post by delecti »

dyauspitr wrote: post #241
delecti wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then don't get 100g of protein. Most people don't need anywhere near that much.

The average person is going to have a hard time getting through two cans of chickpeas, which are some of the highest almost complete protein sources when it comes to beans and legumes. As you can anecdotally see with most vegans it’s almost impossible to get the required protein using that diet. Even Indian cuisine, which is the closest humans have come to perfecting vegetarian dishes, heavily, heavily supplement wit…

Then don't exclusively get legumes via cans of chickpeas? It's just a weirdly specific and inconvenient strawman you've latched on to. Rice and beans, lentil soups or curries, black bean burgers, seitan, tofu, nuts. There are just so many ways to get enough protein (with "enough" being "way less than most Americans get").

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#244

Post by xattt »

CWuestefeld wrote: post #115
xattt wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Oral sodium sulfate in a single dose has been found to cause increased gastrointestinal (GI) events > Sodium phosphate is no longer recommended as a bowel preparation regimen due to its serious side effects Essentially, put in the effort and do the liquid bowel prep. Consider adding flavour drops to your drink, icing it or turn it into a slushie to make it slightly more interesting to drink. The PEG will make the i…

Essentially, put in the effort and do the liquid bowel prep. It's not just about effort. I must do the liquid prep due to my Crohn's disease. And while I am able to get the liquid down (as you note, it helps to make it as cold as possible; also, suck on an ice cube before drinking to numb the taste buds), I can't keep it down. Within an hour it has me evacuating from both ends. For my last test, I barely slept at all…

It must be really challenging to feel like you are an outlier, and that medical advice does not fit you.

There are going to be niche clinical situations where the benefits outweigh the risks of what is otherwise generally not recommended. If you’re not able to tolerate the liquid prep, you’re obviously better to take an oral fleet than no prep at all.

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#245

Post by genewitch »

bonsai_spool wrote: post #233
genewitch wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they give citations which i was going through and literally copied and pasted the CITE to you, not the AI. i only answered the specific question of where the number "48" or the range 40-80 came from. my cite even shows perforations are 3-5 per 10000 so i don't know what you're on me about

> they give citations which i was going through Yes, I am sure. Do send the actual citations. > my cite even shows perforations are 3-5 per 10000 An implausible number for humans who have actual, non-LLM experience in this area

my EXPLICIT SOURCE was 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003429 do you require other ones, or do you wanna keep harping on the fact i used LLM as a fucking search engine?

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2779987 3.5 per 10,000

take it up with JAMA and the AJG.

do you do SCREENING or DIAGNOSTIC/POLYP REMOVAL?

because there's a difference. And it has nothing to do whether i use google.com or chat.whatever.com to find that out.

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#246

Post by m3047 »

boppo1 wrote: post #212
m3047 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is funny. I've had an unbelievable string of bad doctors / clinics... almost as though something is wrong with medical care around here. Couple of years ago the latest doctor who I fired started talking colonoscopies. I asked some basic questions like how do they get paid? How much do they get paid? Who inspects their facilities? He took great umbrage at the notion that the doctors were getting "bounties" for ni…

What an interesting and obvious approach, wish I'd thought of it. Tell me more about your inquiry for the answers the doctor avoided.

I tend to let Feynman, Fermi, and Bayes guide my inquiries generally in that order. Part of the process is generating good questions; another part of the process is generating good actionable questions (tailored to the moment). Questions which are obvious, which are "horseshoes and hand grenades" type questions, based on what we know now. Follow things a little bit, test it, see where it's soft.

In this case I called public health and building inspection agencies and asked them what sort of ongoing inspections there were for clinics and other medical facilities. That turned up databases online, and keywords which turned up other databases.

What was the germ (pun intended) of this inquiry? Several years earlier, sitting in the waiting room of a different clinic, and the linen supply company pushes a cart through (gets buzzed through to the back) to collect the dirty linen, wearing gloves. Like they did this every day. Many years ago, the memo taped to the doors to a lab wing at a biotech: "gloves must be removed when greeting visitors". Various reports over the years concerning improperly sterilized dental instruments.

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#247

Post by bonsai_spool »

genewitch wrote: post #245
bonsai_spool wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they give citations which i was going through Yes, I am sure. Do send the actual citations. > my cite even shows perforations are 3-5 per 10000 An implausible number for humans who have actual, non-LLM experience in this area

my EXPLICIT SOURCE was 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003429 do you require other ones, or do you wanna keep harping on the fact i used LLM as a fucking search engine? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2779987 3.5 per 10,000 take it up with JAMA and the AJG. do you do SCREENING or DIAGNOSTIC/POLYP REMOVAL? because there's a difference. And it has nothing to do whether i use google.com or chat.whatever.com to…

> do you wanna keep harping on the fact i used LLM as a fucking search engine?

You didn't give me a source before now, so I unfortunately had no other source to challenge except the LLM!

> https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2779987 3.5 per 10,000

Different source, friend. Please note that they say 3.1, not 3.5.

That is at about 25% less than 4 (and even less than 5, let alone your previous assertions). And if either you or your LLM troubled yourself to read the article, even this is a confounded number in that we cannot determine whether low-volume, 'community' operators are worse than high-volume settings.

> do you do SCREENING or DIAGNOSTIC/POLYP REMOVAL?

We are talking about screening—once you have a target to remove, you are looking at a high-likelihood-of-cancer population. I am fully aware of this, so I don't understand why you are bringing up this difference which has not yet figured into our discussion. Is this something your LLM suggested to you?

---

I think the thing to take away is that LLMs do not yet replace human understanding and discretion.

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#248

Post by jrm4 »

jrm4 wrote: post #122
TrackerFF wrote: post #8

Had my first colonoscopy 4 months ago, after going for a couple of years with every red flag symptom under the sun. The procedure was a piece of cake. As the standard is where I'm from (Norway), I was only administered some sedatives - but honestly I couldn't feel much difference. I watched the procedure on the screen, which was quite fascinating. The worst part, by far, was the emptying / prepping. A month prior to…

Okay, so another pro-tip for prep. I can promise it's not bad at all if you're already very regular. So what you do is, schedule it for weeks or months out as you can and use that to develop good eating and fiber habits over that time. You have a deadline and real stakes in the game. You will literally hurt more unless you get that straight before then. Win-win.

Most of my downvotes I'll take very proudly, but this one just confuses me

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#249

Post by [deleted] »

Hamuko wrote: post #50
TrackerFF wrote: post #8

Had my first colonoscopy 4 months ago, after going for a couple of years with every red flag symptom under the sun. The procedure was a piece of cake. As the standard is where I'm from (Norway), I was only administered some sedatives - but honestly I couldn't feel much difference. I watched the procedure on the screen, which was quite fascinating. The worst part, by far, was the emptying / prepping. A month prior to…

I had a colonoscopy without any sedatives and I agree, the prepping was worse. Not eating for 24 hours was easy, drinking the solution the night before was unpleasant, and drinking the solution the day of was awful. My pro tip would be to take the day off work. Trying to work while drinking the solution in the morning didn't really work.

[deleted]

Re: Is "colorectal cancer" rising in "young people"?

#250

Post by genewitch »

bonsai_spool wrote: post #247
genewitch wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my EXPLICIT SOURCE was 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003429 do you require other ones, or do you wanna keep harping on the fact i used LLM as a fucking search engine? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2779987 3.5 per 10,000 take it up with JAMA and the AJG. do you do SCREENING or DIAGNOSTIC/POLYP REMOVAL? because there's a difference. And it has nothing to do whether i use google.com or chat.whatever.com to…

> do you wanna keep harping on the fact i used LLM as a fucking search engine? You didn't give me a source before now, so I unfortunately had no other source to challenge except the LLM! > https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2779987 3.5 per 10,000 Different source, friend. Please note that they say 3.1, not 3.5. That is at about 25% less than 4 (and even less than 5, let alone your previous assertions).…

we're both being jerks, so let's both stop. Me first. Sorry. the AJG paper shows 5.15 (the meta study) and JAMA shows 3.1

those two numbers fall within the range of "3 - 5 per 10,000"

the thing in the first sentence of my reply is called a DOI, it's a document identifier, that you can type into google or bing and it will pull up the correct journal citation i was citing.

I understand that the JAMA paper said 3.1, but it also said a number almost 5 times higher near there for "major complication", separate from perforation.

My original reply, where i did the > block quote, is from the AJG source; 10.14309/ajg.0000000000003429

And, for all we know someone is using a roto-rooter to perform colonoscopies and throwing the statistics off

Post reply on HN