Author Topic: Episode #666  (Read 3882 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 443
Re: Episode #666
« Reply #75 on: May 07, 2018, 10:35:35 PM »
Once again you confuse your own anecdote with conclusive evidence and make generalizations based on that which you apply to the entire population.

You realize this is a skeptics forum?

Also I did quite well eating low carb meals in France and my German low carb friends find plenty of low carb foods to enjoy. Do you know how many kinds of sausage they have in Germany?

It sounds like you’re having a harder time finding good food for your anecdotal diet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CarbShark,

You do realise I’m a high carbohydrate/low fat VEGETARIAN, don’t you?

Yes, which is why you have a harder time finding decent meal than I do, especially when traveling.  (You'd probably do well in India, though).

CarbShark,

Not that I’d want to visit India.  I don’t particularly like hot climates.  And I don’t like Indian vegetarian food (there’s no one vegetarian diet).

My point though was that restaurants don’t cater to vegetarians particularly well.  Often it’s just a choice of pasta plus some sort of tomato sauce topping, which is pretty bland.  At home, I microwave around 10 different vegetables (including tomato, which I know is actually a fruit) for a vegetable casserole, and include some cheese, tofu and walnuts, and each bite is completely different.

I’m starting a 12 day tour today, which has many meals included (including breakfast which I never eat at home).  I just hope the other meals will be acceptable.  At a pinch, I’ll ask for salad and cheese, with bread, plenty of bread, which at least has plenty of taste.

A high fat/low carbohydrate ketogenic diet is pretty much a fad diet.  You might find restaurants that cater for the market, but in most restaurants you’d be forced to guess what ingredients are actually in the meals, whether they actually include flour filler or whatever.

It’s still my point that if you’re consuming exactly the same number of calories in food as you are burning, so your body weight is constant (which is why I think a good set of bathroom scales is more important that a set of kitchen scales - which reminds me; I need to find some bathroom scales somewhere since I haven’t weighed myself for 3 weeks), it doesn’t matter whether most of your calories are in fat (and protein) or carbohydrate.

In the first case, you’re burning fat and ketone bodies for energy mainly.  And producing glucose from some amino acids (and perhaps glycerol from fat) in gluconeogenesis to supply the brain (which can also run on ketone bodies). 

In the second case, you’re burning some of the carbohydrate for energy, and converting the rest to fat, which is then burned (there are limited stores of glycogen - when I ran marathons there was a fad of carbohydrate loading for 3 days before the marathon, which never seemed to work for me.  I found that the extra stored glycogen only provided enough energy for the first 10 kilometres, which is about 600 kcals.  Most of the marathon is run on fat, which is when I dropped breakfast from my diet - I’d do a long session of deep water running in a deep pool with a buoyancy belt to deplete muscle glycogen stores, and then in the early afternoon I would go for a 10 kilometre run to get used to running on fat - and perhaps ketone bodies since I’d be carbohydrate depleted by then - and then afterwards I’d have my first meal of the day.  And I found it was easy to adapt to, with no feelings of hunger ever, so I kept to skipping breakfast permanently).


Offline AtheistApotheosis

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Episode #666
« Reply #76 on: May 17, 2018, 12:58:25 PM »
This is what happens when you try to use a very stupid and limited piece of software loose on vulnerable people. And what is worse, they are still doing it.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/apr/04/centrelink-robo-debt-program-accused-of-enforcing-illegal-debts

And this is how the department of human services reacted to questions about the debacle.

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2018/03/the-department-of-human-services-says-robodebt-went-well-and-delivered-lots-of-savings/

The cynicism is jaw dropping, the software showed more compassion.
So what was their next move.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-04-20/centrelink-cracking-down-on-$900m-worth-of-welfare-debts/9677886

I can't wait for our robot overlords, they are bound to be nicer.



Offline AtheistApotheosis

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 47
Re: Episode #666
« Reply #77 on: May 17, 2018, 01:40:22 PM »
Worrying now about AI and morality is like worrying now about not corrupting intelegent alian coltures from other star systems or galaxies.
Might be entertaining for SF flicks but taking it seriousely is weird.

On the subject of AI, am I the only one missing discussion of the self driving accidents? and the dishonest Tesla/Musk press releases.
This is just a start, since billions are riding on this (no pun..), we are going to experience a lot of fake statistics about the safety of self-driving cars - Skeptics should start being skeptical.
I suspect that people who will point that out would immidiattly become "anti-science" and "anti-progress".

Also, I am missing discussion of the most interesting science news for a long time, Brian Wansink head of the Cornell Food Lab, one of the biggest stars of "nutrition science" and his exploits.
Reading a lot of nutriotion science I was always suspicious of the research standards in the field of nutriotion, shocking to see it so spectacullary exposed. 

Getting a PHD before commenting on morality, really?
Morality is the one thing where a evryones opiniion is exactly equal, envoking elitism here is completly missplaced and is a case of severe scientism.
Consensus and Democracy are the only basis for Morality, not elitist technocrats with PHDs - it will be inetresting to be informed where social engineering by PHDs had such a huge success?

17 August 1896 UK – Bridget Driscoll is the first person to die in a petrol-engined car accident, and the first pedestrian victim of an automobile accident in the United Kingdom.
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-10987606
Self driving cars are a new technology, and these days anything new is automaticaly bad and dangerous to some. All technology is dangerous, but it's more often the human factor that's the problem. Mobile phones won't give you cancer, but texting or talking on your mobile while driving is more dangerous than DUI. I hope we reach a point where road accidents are so rare that even a minor dingle is a front page story. The stats for self driving cars have been positive so far.

https://www.axios.com/humans-cause-most-self-driving-car-accidents-1513304490-02cdaf3d-551f-46e6-ad98-637e6ef2c0b9.html

Though opinions are divided.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/are-autonomous-cars-really-safer-than-human-drivers/

And even the more pesimistic interpretations of the statistics show that human drivers are the problem.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2015/10/31/study-self-driving-cars-accidents/74946614/

Offline gebobs

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Episode #666
« Reply #78 on: June 13, 2018, 12:49:49 PM »
Obviously, we are at the forefront of self-driving technology. It's only going to get safer. Human drivers and their cars have gotten much safer over the decades, but the low hanging fruit there is gone. Incremental improvements will be smaller going forward.

Self-driving cars will be better than human drivers by far if they aren't already. I don't want to make light of a few deaths but let's be clear...we make light of human accidents all the time. We're inured to them. 30k people die every year and it's an acceptable rate. And I'm not being glib. We could drive that down to 10k easily by making the national speed limit 30 mph but who in their right mind wants to? Not me. I'll take my chances at 80.

 

personate-rain
personate-rain