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

The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 261 posts

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#251

Post by tomhow »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #140
hombre_fatal wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? Technology gives us free lunch after free lunch. And in the not so distant future we can just gene-edit our offspring, the ultimate free lunch.

[flagged]

This kind of comment is unwelcome on HN. Do not comment like this here. The notion that we should withhold medical care for the sake of genetic fitness of future generations is vile, no matter how much it's dressed up to seem scientifically valid. Please take some time to read all the HN guidelines and make an effort to observe them if you want to participate here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#252

Post by tpm »

prewett wrote: post #249
tpm wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yesterday I ate lots of sugar in the form of sweets. It happened during a 100km bike ride (against a strong headwind even) and I would otherwise bonk [0], so I'm pretty sure it was good for me, my arteries and my weight loss. And that's the issue with simple messaging like 'sugar bad'. 0. https://www.ride25.com/cycling-blog/bonking-birds-bees/

Citing a 100 km bike ride as a counter-example is not very helpful. Sure, technically, the parent was worded as an absolute statement, but I think a 100 km bike ride is such an outlier that it is irrelevant to a discussion about diet. The implicit assumption is that we are talking about relatively normal diets, and clearly biking 100 km is well outside normal. Besides, are you sure that eating that sugar with more fi…

> but I think a 100 km bike ride is such an outlier

I don't think it is, there are a lot of bikers, runners, triathlon people between my colleagues and friends that regularly do that much energy output. Several of them even do much longer rides. And we are not even that young or sport-mad.

> Besides, are you sure that eating that sugar with more fiber would not have been better for you?

Yes, you don't want to get your bowels very active/full during biking. As an aside, top road cyclists (and I'm sure also long distance runners etc) are currently consuming up to 120g of glucose/fructose per hour during their performance, and have to train their guts so they are able to consume that much.

> And I don't think the latter case is relevant to a discussion of general diet, even if the post lacked explicit qualifiers.

And the point of my post was exactly that I think that either there should be always explicit qualifiers around 'sugar bad' or better just don't write that at all, because it's plain wrong. Sugar as a reasonable part of a quality diet is fine. It's different for children and obviously some other groups of people, but it's not bad in general (and if you want to lose weight, try to eliminate starch, not simple or short-chain sugars, but that's too hard for most people, and might not be healthy either). And messages like that just destroy the credibility of the speaker.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#253

Post by basch »

ballenf wrote: post #184
basch wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Seed oils probably aren't ideal Except they are. A refined monounsaturated fat is in the upper tier of perfect calorie. It makes a lot of sense for omega-9's to be a major part of caloric consumption. The omega-3 and omega-6 when fresh and uncooked are also unnecessary demonized by the idea that they are immediately rancid. Like many things the problems arise from the implementation or how they are used, not the che…

Ideally, yes. But the failure modes in seed oil manufacturing are what scare me. How many accidental hexane exposures would it take to outweigh a lifetime of the benefits of seed oils over more natural, but less healthy, oils?

I remain unconvinced that hexane in the oil poses any serious risk.

It has such a low boiling point, it’s heated. It all evaporates out. What’s the mechanism keeping hidden undetected hexane in the product.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#254

Post by soco »

tpm wrote: post #252
prewett wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citing a 100 km bike ride as a counter-example is not very helpful. Sure, technically, the parent was worded as an absolute statement, but I think a 100 km bike ride is such an outlier that it is irrelevant to a discussion about diet. The implicit assumption is that we are talking about relatively normal diets, and clearly biking 100 km is well outside normal. Besides, are you sure that eating that sugar with more fi…

> but I think a 100 km bike ride is such an outlier I don't think it is, there are a lot of bikers, runners, triathlon people between my colleagues and friends that regularly do that much energy output. Several of them even do much longer rides. And we are not even that young or sport-mad. > Besides, are you sure that eating that sugar with more fiber would not have been better for you? Yes, you don't want to get you…

Extreme sports is definitely nothing "normal" - whether I define "normal" as a today's statistic, or as evolutionary history. Your needs and metrics are nothing Joe Regular can use in his daily life, which the OP pointed very clearly and you don't need to refute. Your body is a completely different beast and we would be comparing apples with oranges, only confusing an already confused domain. Because I don't believe that any of your guidelines about guts training is coming from "general surgeon advice" - you are using specialized forums and special indications, while this discussion here is on a general forum, about general indications.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#255

Post by soco »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #176
stringfood wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

wonder which is worse sugar or alcohol, 2 drinks a day vs 2 cans of coke a day

Probably alcohol, but they will both make you overweight, alcohol is metabolized in a similiar way. When you see how much sugar it takes to make alcohol it starts to make sense.

The sugar used to make alcohol is not found in the alcohol itself. Like the oil used to make plastics is not found in the food packaging. Don't mix two very different end products with very different effects - what gets killed by alcohol is not what gets killed by refined sugars. And overweight is not caused by sugar or by alcohol directly, or alone, so again it's a third discussion. Long story short: don't overuse anything. If you want only the simplest answer.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#256

Post by tpm »

soco wrote: post #254
tpm wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I think a 100 km bike ride is such an outlier I don't think it is, there are a lot of bikers, runners, triathlon people between my colleagues and friends that regularly do that much energy output. Several of them even do much longer rides. And we are not even that young or sport-mad. > Besides, are you sure that eating that sugar with more fiber would not have been better for you? Yes, you don't want to get you…

Extreme sports is definitely nothing "normal" - whether I define "normal" as a today's statistic, or as evolutionary history. Your needs and metrics are nothing Joe Regular can use in his daily life, which the OP pointed very clearly and you don't need to refute. Your body is a completely different beast and we would be comparing apples with oranges, only confusing an already confused domain. Because I don't believe…

There is nothing extreme about doing a 100km ride from time to time, I don't even have the body of an athlete. That bit about training the guts was an aside and clearly marked as such. I don't do it.

'sugar bad' is a clearly wrong advice that only confuses people in any context.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#257

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

port11 wrote: post #248
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we need to stop thinking of ‘magic bullets’ that’ll get us out of eating better I daresay that dietary fibre is likely the only 'magic bullet' that would improve people's diets and health. Or at least, non-processed fibre as some "food products" have cellulose/sawdust added to bump up the fibre figure.

And yet, increase consumption too much too quickly and you end up with influencers that talk about constipation and haemorrhoids, and how fibre causes IBS. (I agree with your points btw.)

Yes, suddenly changing your dietary amount of fibre leads to various side effects. However, having lots of fibre in your diet will tend to prevent bowel diseases rather than causing them. (I just looked on the NHS page about IBS and sorbitol pops up there a couple of times which I thought was interesting - https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/irritable-bowel-syndrome-ibs/d...)

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#258

Post by overflow897 »

tpm wrote: post #256
soco wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extreme sports is definitely nothing "normal" - whether I define "normal" as a today's statistic, or as evolutionary history. Your needs and metrics are nothing Joe Regular can use in his daily life, which the OP pointed very clearly and you don't need to refute. Your body is a completely different beast and we would be comparing apples with oranges, only confusing an already confused domain. Because I don't believe…

There is nothing extreme about doing a 100km ride from time to time, I don't even have the body of an athlete. That bit about training the guts was an aside and clearly marked as such. I don't do it. 'sugar bad' is a clearly wrong advice that only confuses people in any context.

Arguing that a 100km bike ride is not an edge case seems disingenuous. Most people could not complete a 3-6hr bike ride without weeks of training and my guess is most people on hacker news probably live fairly sedentary lives. "Added sugar bad" is generally good advice for most the population which statistically is fairly sedentary and doesn't require a huge amount of immediately available, low fiber energy.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#259

Post by CyberDildonics »

soco wrote: post #255
CyberDildonics wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably alcohol, but they will both make you overweight, alcohol is metabolized in a similiar way. When you see how much sugar it takes to make alcohol it starts to make sense.

The sugar used to make alcohol is not found in the alcohol itself. Like the oil used to make plastics is not found in the food packaging. Don't mix two very different end products with very different effects - what gets killed by alcohol is not what gets killed by refined sugars. And overweight is not caused by sugar or by alcohol directly, or alone, so again it's a third discussion. Long story short: don't overuse a…

The sugar used to make alcohol is not found in the alcohol itself.

Not relevant.

what gets killed by alcohol is not what gets killed by refined sugars

This has nothing to do with the discussion.

very different end products with very different effects

In this case they share the effects being talked about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8G8tLsl_A4

And overweight is not caused by sugar or by alcohol directly,

They are the major contributing factors to obesity. This is not generally disputed. It is a systemic problem and trying to deny the problems by saying the primary factor isn't "the direct cause" (without any detail, nuance or information of your own) is the kind of hand waving people have been doing to obscure people understanding these problems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fermentation

https://thep53.com/how-alcohol-is-metabolized-and-its-relati...

https://scitechdaily.com/the-sugar-pathway-that-links-alcoho...

The difference between out two comments is that what I said is relevant and sourced.

Re: The seed oil panic is hurting my cardiac patients

#260

Post by tpm »

overflow897 wrote: post #258
tpm wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing extreme about doing a 100km ride from time to time, I don't even have the body of an athlete. That bit about training the guts was an aside and clearly marked as such. I don't do it. 'sugar bad' is a clearly wrong advice that only confuses people in any context.

Arguing that a 100km bike ride is not an edge case seems disingenuous. Most people could not complete a 3-6hr bike ride without weeks of training and my guess is most people on hacker news probably live fairly sedentary lives. "Added sugar bad" is generally good advice for most the population which statistically is fairly sedentary and doesn't require a huge amount of immediately available, low fiber energy.

> Most people could not complete a 3-6hr bike ride without weeks of training and my guess is most people on hacker news probably live fairly sedentary lives.

I do live a fairly sedentary life too. The point of aerobic exercise such as cycling is to counteract that. I log my exercise on Strava, which reportedly has 50 million MAU. I'm sure at least half of them (+ many millions of non-Strava users) could do that easily (or equivalent in their chosen sport). Still an edge case?

"Watch your energy balance", "watch your weight", nutrients, processed foods, etc. I would consider generally good advice. "Sugar bad" or even "added sugar bad" certainly not.

Post reply on HN