Man dies from eating more than a bag of liquorice a day

No, it causes arrhythmia and high blood pressure, heart disease which may have consequences like sudden cardiac death.

> Are you arguing someone will have an appetite for licorice and keep eating a lot even if it doesn't taste good? Or the opposite? I'm not following the scenario.

I agree that you are not following. I am saying that appetite is not the same as taste.

> Because noticing a single symptom, with no idea of the cause, doesn't stop you from dying. Even if you make a doctor appointment it could be too late.

Hypokalemia is rarely fatal because the symptoms are obviously alarming

> And I misunderstood for a good reason, because this conversation started with someone joking that they "knew" licorice was poisonous because it tasted bad.

Yes, which I responded to by saying that many benign and essential substances are poisonous in the right volume.

> And I was talking about how that actually happens with overdoses of salt and water, but doesn't happen with licorice.

Which you've failed to substantiate.

> So I interpreted the "feels" sentence in the way that had A) relevance to taste and B) actually disagreed with what I was saying, since you started your reply with "Bollocks".

So you misunderstood my argument.

> The way you're now telling me to interpret that sentence means that your second paragraph in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24602628 has no actual connection to anything I said in the comment you were replying to. I hadn't said anything about feeling symptoms.

Exactly, which is why I brought it up, because it's another regulator of consumption that healthy people won't ignore. You can't in good faith argue that it is only now that you understand that, because you've accepted that as the premise of my argument throughout our discussion, however confusing it with the notion that people have "inbuilt licorice systems".

I'm not calling you a liar.

> I really thought your premise was that "too much licorice" would be what the person felt.

You just said that you thought my premise "had A) relevance to taste", and that's what I don't think you could argue in good faith.

> Because noticing "a weird symptom" won't save your life unless you can figure out the puzzle fast enough.

Yes, there's always someone oblivious enough to die for the most ridiculous reasons. Hence people die from water poisoning for chugging down amounts of water that defy common sense, people that die because they don't have the mental capacity to realize that eating spoonfuls of salt is harmful, and apparently people that die because there is no question in their minds whether a licorice based diet might be harmful.

> Did you not look at the article I linked? "Very few specific appetites for particular nutrients have been identified in humans. The most robustly identified are salt appetite/sodium appetite."

That doesn't substantiate the idea that the perceived taste of salt changes as you eat more of it.

> Also here's why it's not entirely ridiculous to think something like that about licorice: People will figure out associations over time, so you can in fact have a learned ability to detect too much licorice. That's what I thought you were arguing.

Forgive me for not understanding your point, but if on one hand you assume that I'm arguing for the existence of "inbuilt licorice systems" (a really dumb point that a dumb person would make) and on the other hand that I'm arguing for the existence of a learned association (an interesting point that's at least worthy of examination, though ultimately not my point), you aren't making things easy for me.