|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIoG4jPzAjY
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 05:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
Which one of you buttlords changed my avatar?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I got back from ten days in Italy (mostly north Italy) a bit ago. The food was largely as expected- way more raw meat than I expected though. So THE SECRET was food all along?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 06:52
|
|
|
Manuel Calavera posted:So THE SECRET was food all along? THE SECRET is that mid-high-end Italian restaurants are aping oldstyle French haute cuisine (French dishes with Italian ingredient substitutions, frequently swimming in butter), and the most enjoyable meals I had while there were at the midrange local restos, or budget pizza places. Venice has finished its transition into a tourist trap, and I wish traffic law in Italy was more than a suggestion, especially when it comes to lane dividers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
Good to know if I ever make it to Italy then. But that's no THE SECRET I meant. More the ones involving clowns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2017 15:01
|
|
|
I read Gary Taubes' book on how sugar is a poison that has killed more people than gunpowder weaponry and most epidemic diseases through insulin resistance, obesity and diabetes, and I'm getting a little panicked here because I just realized I drink a ton of skim milk; What effect does lactose sugar in lowfat milk and dairy have on insulin? Is it a bad idea to consume a lot of it? I don't have any problems with insulin/diabetes stuff or obesity and never had, but I drink a lot of milk
icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 11:06 on Jan 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 10:30
|
|
|
this catte owns bones
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 11:05
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I read Gary Taubes' book on how sugar is a poison that has killed more people than gunpowder weaponry and most epidemic diseases through insulin resistance, obesity and diabetes, and I'm getting a little panicked here because I just realized I drink a ton of skim milk; What effect does lactose sugar in lowfat milk and dairy have on insulin? Is it a bad idea to consume a lot of it? I don't have any problems with insulin/diabetes stuff or obesity and never had, but I drink a lot of milk Gary Taubes is a fraud with zero nutritional science credentials. His entire set of claims around sugar are bogus. Unless you have a family history of problems with insulin, or are developing insulin resistance, or have a diet consisting solely of sugar, drinking skim milk is fine and good for you. Even if you were, it's got a low glycemic index rating. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Jan 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
I disagree, drinking skim milk is gross and lame as gently caress in any circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 23:09
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Gary Taubes is a fraud with zero nutritional science credentials. His entire set of claims around sugar are bogus. Unless you have a family history of problems with insulin, or are developing insulin resistance, or have a diet consisting solely of sugar, drinking skim milk is fine and good for you. Even if you were, it's got a low glycemic index rating. Out of curiosity, do you have any simple explanation/elaboration of why the "sugar causes high insulin, high insulin makes you fat" theory as promoted by Tabues and Robert Lustig is bogus? Just googling it produces a huge shitload of contradictory stuff
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
iirc, obesity and type two diabetes aren't directly linked; they share a common cause. namely, spiking your blood sugar all drat day every day for 20 years. i am not a doctor or a dietician or any other kind of scientist/clinician, though
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Out of curiosity, do you have any simple explanation/elaboration of why the "sugar causes high insulin, high insulin makes you fat" theory as promoted by Tabues and Robert Lustig is bogus? Just googling it produces a huge shitload of contradictory stuff That's partly true but not part of Taubes or Lustig's work, and it depends on prior dietary and genetic factors. Taubes and Lustig both subscribe to the idea that sugar (especially Artificial Processed Sugar) is a Toxin Poison Badthing that caused the Plague of Egypt, the British Cholera epidemics, and the popularity of Puddle of Mudd, via a bunch of routes that no one else believes. Lustig in particular loves extrapolating from mouse model studies, especially his own studies that no one else can replicate (he's hated universally in nutrition science circles as a fraud). Both men make their careers riding the coattails of the naturalistic fallacy movement in nutrition, a bottomless well of money. Sugars are necessary to the functioning of the human body-people just eat more than they need. Sugar consumption in some patterns (read, eating a lot of it) and/or genetic effects lead to diabetes. Insulin doesn't "make you fat" so much as it's necessary for normal digestion to occur. this site gives the short version. The thing that makes people overweight, barring metabolic disorders, is calories. Calories calories calories. Sugar is a source of calories- so is a fuckton of other stuff, too, though. Sugar isn't special in this regard. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 14:14 on Jan 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 14:11
|
|
|
Yeah, my son has type I diabetes. If he doesn't get insulin he'll die.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 14:17
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:That's partly true but not part of Taubes or Lustig's work, and it depends on prior dietary and genetic factors. Taubes and Lustig both subscribe to the idea that sugar (especially Artificial Processed Sugar) is a Toxin Poison Badthing that caused the Plague of Egypt, the British Cholera epidemics, and the popularity of Puddle of Mudd, via a bunch of routes that no one else believes. Lustig in particular loves extrapolating from mouse model studies, especially his own studies that no one else can replicate (he's hated universally in nutrition science circles as a fraud). Both men make their careers riding the coattails of the naturalistic fallacy movement in nutrition, a bottomless well of money. What about the impact of sugar consumption on insulin production leading to increased appetite etc? How does that factor in? I was under the assumption (this is outside my field) that increased consumption of raw sugars leads to broader changes in insulin amounts which leads to acute increases in appetite which would spur consumption of more calories. Is this incorrect?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
That Works posted:What about the impact of sugar consumption on insulin production leading to increased appetite etc? How does that factor in? Hasn't been demonstrated in humans. Appetite studies that are meaningful are really, really hard to do, and there's a theoretical argument for a mechanism there, but it's not been found in any well-designed studies meant to test the hypothesis. Generally, a plausible mechanism would require a bunch of additional moving parts that go beyond just the flat carb content. This hasn't stopped Lustig et al from using it as a fallback position when direct negative effects are applied. There's also no clear reason why "raw" sugar would function differently, except that it plays into the "sweet white death" narrative. While I'm on this, sugar isn't addictive, either. That's a one-two punch of poor interpretation of brain imaging and using animal models to make claims about human behavior. It's literally "eating sweet things makes the pleasure receptors in this region light up- just like cocaine!". We've covered some of this stuff in the pseudoscience thread up in science academia and linguistics. Nutrition science is a mess as a field (it's a hard area to do good research in, there's a lot of industry meddling, industry is actually the only group funding good studies, people don't know basic science methods, etc), and the sugar stuff is the worst of all- it's been the subject of a proxy war between corn and cane industries, as well as a bunch of alt-med charlatans like Lustig, for decades. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Jan 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 14:38
|
|
|
Wait... so does that mean that going on diets like paleo, south-beach, only eating food that is orange, or only drinking food is basically wrong? So my espresso enemas don't work?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 14:49
|
|
|
Happy Hat posted:Wait... so does that mean that going on diets like paleo, south-beach, only eating food that is orange, or only drinking food is basically wrong? Well, they work in some ways. I find your bottom much more pleasing to ream after you've had a good coffee enema.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
Things that also light up the pleasure sensors are sex, roller-coasters, veiwing the Grand Canyon for the first time, and a good cream cheese bagel. I dunno about you, all I got from cocaine was wonderfully clear sinuses for three days.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:28
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:Things that also light up the pleasure sensors are sex, roller-coasters, veiwing the Grand Canyon for the first time, and a good cream cheese bagel. Wasabi and horseradish do the same thing, and have the advantage of being cheaper, safer, and legal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:37
|
|
|
Are we still talking about putting thing up our butts?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Happy Hat posted:Are we still talking about putting thing up our butts? Yes. Next time try a wasabi enema. It's truly invigorating!
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:56
|
|
|
therattle posted:Yes. Next time try a wasabi enema. It's truly invigorating! But how's the follow-up "reaming"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:59
|
|
|
theres a will theres moe posted:But how's the follow-up "reaming"? Truly invigorating! For a taster try rubbing some wasabi paste on your Johnson. You won't regret it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
I go old school and just shove whole horseradish roots up my anus for a really refreshing pick-me-up. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhaphanidosis
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:I go old school and just shove whole horseradish roots up my anus for a really refreshing pick-me-up. Holy poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Why the hell do I need to go to a cooking forum to learn that people insert ginger in their anuses, and then call it 'figging', and that it is common in the 50 shades of.... circles in the US? Rectally administered horse radish seems like somewhat hardcore though... But why the fish?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Happy Hat posted:Rectally administered horse radish seems like somewhat hardcore though... But why the fish? It's a palate cleanser, oddly enough.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
There's kinda a long way from that place to the palate.. Edit: therattle: Why do you stuff more or less alive fishes up yourself? Is it true that it cleans your palate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:03
|
|
|
Happy Hat posted:There's kinda a long way from that place to the palate.. No, it's for the wriggling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
ok... I have a new brother in law, who incidentally has the same name as me... He is a brewmaster at a largish brewery (he makes a couple of million liters a year) - anyways, he also experiments.. I like him better than any of my previous in-laws, incidentally! Anyways... He made a experimental run that will never hit the market named 'Happy Hat got drunk'... I opened one of them - 75 cl - it was good - I drank it while cooking.. opened another one... Have just called him - they're loving 13%... 13%... I am drunk..
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
I will now proceed to love the world - show my wife sweet lovin', be awesome by fighting world decease (oh yeah - got a new job fighting polio, TB and poo poo like that for Bill Gates and WHO), and feeling that therattle is the most awesome person next to dino. .... Why the hell are people getting me drunk by proxy... Seriously though... Much, much love!
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:While I'm on this, sugar isn't addictive, either. your whole post was pretty well scientifically grounded except for this wild overreach compulsive eating is a thing, dummy. it's an observable phenomenon. as is the frequency with which compulsive eaters seek sweet foods. the fact that we only poorly understand the myriad of causes underlying both compulsive behaviors in general and compulsive eating in particular doesn't mean you get to say "sugar isn't addictive"
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
That's kinda dumb to get fussy about as couldn't you say that pretty much anything could be addictive if your brain is wired that way? I compulsively buy fishing tackle when I'm stressed out at work, I don't think any reasonable person would say "rubber worms are addictive ".
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 22:28
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:your whole post was pretty well scientifically grounded except for this wild overreach Again, I go into the discussion over this in detail in the pseudoscience thread. There are several definitions of addiction, but the ones that have meaning beyond "ever trigger a pleasure sensor" don't apply to sugar. Hell, the most effective definitions exclude substances like sugar by definition, and the people advocating for eating disorders to be considered a form of addiction still wouldn't say that sugar is addictive-they'd say it acts as a behavioral cue for some people with the condition. The people who do want eating disorders (or other behavioral patterns, like gambling) to be considered addiction are largely people working in treatment. They generally acknowledge that they're stretching or changing the prior formal definition, but feel they are justified in doing so because it would give people suffering from those problems access to more resources for treatment, which they urgently need. Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Jan 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 22:36
|
|
|
Happy Hat posted:I will now proceed to love the world - show my wife sweet lovin', be awesome by fighting world decease (oh yeah - got a new job fighting polio, TB and poo poo like that for Bill Gates and WHO), and feeling that therattle is the most awesome person next to dino. .... Aw hell, HH, putting me after only dino is swell. That job sounds loving great! Congratulations. I hope it's as fulfilling as you want it to be.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Sugars are necessary to the functioning of the human body-people just eat more than they need. Sugar consumption in some patterns (read, eating a lot of it) and/or genetic effects lead to diabetes. Insulin doesn't "make you fat" so much as it's necessary for normal digestion to occur. this site gives the short version.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Again, I go into the discussion over this in detail in the pseudoscience thread. There are several definitions of addiction, but the ones that have meaning beyond "ever trigger a pleasure sensor" don't apply to sugar. Hell, the most effective definitions exclude substances like sugar by definition, and the people advocating for eating disorders to be considered a form of addiction still wouldn't say that sugar is addictive-they'd say it acts as a behavioral cue for some people with the condition. The people who do want eating disorders (or other behavioral patterns, like gambling) to be considered addiction are largely people working in treatment. They generally acknowledge that they're stretching or changing the prior formal definition, but feel they are justified in doing so because it would give people suffering from those problems access to more resources for treatment, which they urgently need. yeah, i realized right after i posted you were just being spergily proscriptive about the outdated definition of addiction
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 02:27
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:yeah, i realized right after i posted you were just being spergily proscriptive about the outdated definition of addiction "outdated" being whatever you disagree with? Again, I've gone into detail on this in the thread where it makes more sense to do so. You can read a several page discussion about it here if you're interested. Babylon Astronaut posted:This is bullshit. You have no dietary need for sugar. Your body will synthesize glycogen fine without it. Your point is generally correct, but you do not need to consume sugar for anything. Sorry, carbohydrates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"outdated" being whatever you disagree with? Again, I've gone into detail on this in the thread where it makes more sense to do so. You can read a several page discussion about it here if you're interested. The DEA's page on scheduling says (in part): DEA posted:Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 20:13 |
|
|
SubG posted:First sentence: `Stuff on the controlled substances list has historically gotten there because, at root, it's addictive, rather than because of other harmful side effects'. We can talk about it in the Pseudoscience thread, then.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2017 15:23
|
|