Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #697
« Last post by fuzzyMarmot on Today at 01:07:30 AM »
I hope that The Latinist and Devin can engage in some enlightening debate in this thread. I'll be very interested to follow it-- I think Devin has some interesting ideas, but I share The Latinist's concern about venturing into quantum woo. I'd love it if the two of you could engage with these ideas in a friendly way.

Devin, I think one of the major points of confusion was why dynamical systems and quantum mechanics were brought up in the first place, because it sounds like your work in philosophy is completely distinct (though no less interesting!) than those fields of study.

I hope you continue to use this forum as a way to explain your work in philosophy. I think we will all learn a lot from you!

Side note: I'd encourage you to be more careful with titles and credentials in the future. Misidentifying oneself (or failing to correct others who identify you) as a professor or as possessing a doctorate is generally not cool.
2
Health, Fitness, Nutrition, and Medicine / Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Last post by CarbShark on November 20, 2018, 10:44:56 PM »

Well you published on the ‘LCHF and healthy eating’ thread on October 29, 2018 after a long list of your recent blood tests the comment ‘I had asked about the HGA1c test, serum ketones, and the advanced tests that actually measure LDL, and breakdown particles, but my doctor wouldn’t order any of those for me.  Since all my other risk factors for CVD and diabetes are so low, it’s not an issue and not medically required.  He’s only worried about preventing diseases and doesn’t care if I’m in an argument on the Internet.  If I want those tests I’ll have to order them and pay for them myself (and I just might).’

So you’ve gone from not knowing what your serum ketones are on October 29 to knowing on November 21.


The Dr wouldn’t order the ketones fro the lab but home keto testing very accissible.

The part I was not sure if I would pay for was the full LDL C and LDLp tests which are expensive. (Three figures)



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
3
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #697
« Last post by CarbShark on November 20, 2018, 10:38:41 PM »
I’ll reply in the appropriate thread. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
4
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #697
« Last post by bachfiend on November 20, 2018, 10:24:34 PM »
Am I the only one who sees this as a fundamental issue with the integrity of the podcast?

Yes.

So how much does a seat on the panel for an episode cost?

Maybe I could buy one and join the panel to talk about Diet and Nutrition and the alternate hypothesis for an hour.

(I know they'd have other "topics" but I could bend any discussion around)

That sounds like fun!

/sarcasm

I’d pay for you to appear as a guest rogue to hear you trying to defend your low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diet.  That sounds like fun!

I doubt you’d pay for yourself to appear as a guest rogue though.  You’re too cheap to pay for a blood assay of ketones in order to see if you’re actually in nutritional ketosis.

Ha!  I am very cheap, but wouldn't pay for a seat on the panel anyway.

As for the other, WTF? Not only did I never say that, but I have indeed recently had bloodwork done that did indicate ketosis, and over the years I have purchased two ketone blood meters (which are significantly more expensive than glucose meters) and purchased a ketone breath meter.

And in case you're wondering, between the two meters, the breathalyzer and bloodwork with semi-annual checkups since I started this diet I have never once had a test show I was not in ketosis.

Well you published on the ‘LCHF and healthy eating’ thread on October 29, 2018 after a long list of your recent blood tests the comment ‘I had asked about the HGA1c test, serum ketones, and the advanced tests that actually measure LDL, and breakdown particles, but my doctor wouldn’t order any of those for me.  Since all my other risk factors for CVD and diabetes are so low, it’s not an issue and not medically required.  He’s only worried about preventing diseases and doesn’t care if I’m in an argument on the Internet.  If I want those tests I’ll have to order them and pay for them myself (and I just might).’

So you’ve gone from not knowing what your serum ketones are on October 29 to knowing on November 21.

I’m not arguing with your ketogenic diet not being a perfectly acceptable diet, amongst many other perfectly acceptable diets.  I’m arguing with your proselytising for it being the best and healthiest diet, and the one that should be recommended above all other possible diets.

The best diet for attaining and maintaining a healthy body weight is the one the person can keep to for years and decades, and which varies from person to person.  No one diet fits all.
5
Health, Fitness, Nutrition, and Medicine / Re: LCHF and healthy eating
« Last post by bachfiend on November 20, 2018, 09:36:25 PM »

Well, if the natural evolutionary state for human nutrition is 15-20% protein, 20-30% carbohydrate and 50-65% fat, then why aren’t you proselytising for that diet instead of your low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diet, with carbohydrates at less than 5%?  Your diet is remarkably unnatural.

Three reasons.

Because science shows LCHF-Keto works best and is healthiest

Because obesity is not a normal state and we didn't get there by eating the evolutionary diet, we didn't evolve needing a diet to correct that condition, so it does not follow that the evolutionary diet would reverse the condition. (And, actually, science is pretty clear that LCHF-Keto is more efficient for weightloss than The Paleo Diet, even Cordain would agree with that.)

Because of the naturalistic fallacy. Just because it may be natural doesn't mean it's better.


Quote
We don’t know what the natural diet of preagricultural human societies was.  The hunter-gatherer groups we came into contact with in modern times when we had more than a rough understanding of health and nutrition were hunter-gatherer groups that had been pushed off into marginal land not suitable for agriculture or intensive herding.  Or living on land that wasn’t much good in the first place (such as much of Australia).

That's an oversimplified generalization. We have good and accurate accounts of hunter gatherer pre agricultural populations from numerous locations.

But even then, we know for certain that they had little or no fast simple carbs in their diet. 


Quote
And whatever archaeological evidence of diet there is, it’s only providing an average. Humans eat whatever is easiest available.  If the hunters make a good catch, they’ll eat more fat and protein.  When the hunters fail (the usual situation) then they’ll eat mostly the carbohydrates the gatherers reliably collected.

Without processing, carbs in food are not that abundant. Even wild versions of high carb foods. And they're always bound with fiber.


Quote
Insulin isn’t the only hormone regulating lipase in fat cells.  Insulin downregulates adipocyte lipase.  Glucagon, adrenaline, cortisol and a few other hormones upregulate adipocyte lipase.

It's interesting that in the very next line after asking me for evidence, you makes claims with no evidence to support them.

Quote
Anecdotes are useful...   


and here is where I stop reading.

Right, provide evidence that in long term studies that people on low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diets have a higher probability of having a healthy body weight with a BMI in the healthy range of 18.5 to 25 kg/m^2 and a healthy body fat percentage compared to people on other diets, and that they’re healthier with a longer life expectancy.

When you can do that, I’ll accept that your low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diet is best and healthiest.

But you can’t do that.  The data isn’t available.  All we’ve got available are anecdotes (the people who’ve had the most success with the diet are the most fervent proselytisers), short term studies showing slightly greater weight loss in people on your diet compared to other diets (and an appreciable proportion of the weight loss is water, not fat, due to glycogen depletion) and slight differences in the blood lipid profile of people on your diet (the blood lipid profile isn’t risk for cardiac disease, it’s a proxy for risk.  To know whether making slight changes in the blood lipid profile by dietary manipulation reduces risk of cardiac disease, you need the long term studies.  Otherwise you’re just going on supposition).

Obesity isn’t a normal state in nature.  Nor is being a healthy weight.  Humans in evolutionary history lived in a state of almost permanent starvation with famines outweighing the periods of feast.  Humans evolved to exploit the less common feasts by stacking on fat stores to weather the inevitable coming famines, and to develop a taste for calorie dense foods high in sugar or fat, which are uncommon in nature.

The obesity epidemic is due to the ready availability of cheap, calorie dense, heavily advertised, and allegedly tasty food, partly due to the increasing plague of fast food outlets.  You can be just as easily as fat on a high fat/low carbohydrate diet as you can be on a high carbohydrate/low fat diet if you eat too much.

And people don’t just eat because they’re hungry.  People in functioning developed countries don’t experience hunger.  They eat because they enjoy the food, or they’re bored or worried, or to be social.  When was the last time you were hungry?  I can’t remember when I was ever hungry.  I eat because I enjoy the food.  If I can’t get the food I enjoy, I just don’t eat.

And I don’t need to give sources for the hormones regulating lipolysis in adipocytes.  It’s basic science.  You can look it up for yourself.  Insulin isn’t the only hormone evolved. 

And you still haven’t provided evidence showing that catabolism of vital tissue proteins occurs before lipolysis of fat in fat stores in a state of glycogen depletion.
6
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #697
« Last post by mabell_yah on November 20, 2018, 09:32:36 PM »
I'm kind of embarrassed about the way our guest rogue is being treated. I would like to remind our community members about the principal of charity. If you're here to score points, please stop.
7
General Discussion / Re: Notable passings and other milestones
« Last post by John Albert on November 20, 2018, 09:31:49 PM »
Everybody who cultivated a big, fat, patriotic boner over John McCain's alleged war heroics ought to listen to the latest Dollop.
8
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #697
« Last post by Devin Bray on November 20, 2018, 09:22:30 PM »
Devin Bray, special thanks for doing very well as a guest Rogue – and giving extra support to the SGU at the same time. I don't quite comprehend all of your discussion (because Snowball [nee Snuffles] locked the battery cover on my helmet), but hopefully my perception of what I think I learned is close to what was intended. I do know that the word "metaphysics" has a bad connotation to many people, so it was also a good reminder for me to separate wider terms from how they are used or misused – like how some of my friends profess a hatred for all "skeptics" because a few rough-edged people on YouTube call themselves skeptics.

Along the same vein, it seems too many people don't understand why the study of philosophy is useful and necessary. As much as "science" gets kicked around sometimes, too many people use "philosophy" as nothing more than the punchline of a joke that everyone laughs at even though no one gets it.

Then again, maybe I'm projecting because *I* had no clue for the first thirty-plus years of my life.

By the way, even though I understand some very real concerns that these discussions can be misapplied to promote pseudoscience, I personally never got the impression that you were promoting anything of the kind. I do agree with the need to be careful so that folks like Dr. Oz don't try to contrive "Experience is reality!" out of a fast-paced yet casual discussion, but in-context everyone's intentions were clear to me. (Again though, I may not be up to par with the target audience.)


Now perhaps to showcase my own ignorance to everyone…

Is there a way to teach children the concept of models at a younger age so that it wouldn't be so tough to teach about new paradigms? We may always need to start with something like the current subatomic model simply because most third-graders (and middle-aged folks) don't have an aptitude for probabilistic field equations; however, it would be nice if we had a better way to make sure kids know it's actually more complicated than that than simply saying, "It's actually more complicated than that."

Anyway, I'm looking forward to the creation of that artificial intelligence that will comprehend the true nature of the universe. I just hope it's also smart enough to dumb down the answer enough so that I can kind'a sort'a understand it too.

Thanks again.

Thanks for the support.  It's a tough crowd here, but I'm tough enough to handle it!

I could have probably remedied some of the confusion I caused with a few lines, first denouncing "quantum quackery" on all fronts, then explaining that the kind of "free will" I'm interested in is probably better described as talk about how a deterministic biological robot could be said to influence its own behavior through higher-order control functions.  Mentioning that my opposition is both industrial-strength, so-called "libertarian" free will of the sort espoused by Jean-Paul Sartre AND the hard determinism of someone like Sam Harris would probably have also given my remarks much-needed context, but I was wary of too much name dropping.
9
Forum Games / Re: The Three-Word Story
« Last post by DevoutCatalyst on November 20, 2018, 09:09:34 PM »
"if you continue
10
Podcast Episodes / Re: Episode #697
« Last post by CarbShark on November 20, 2018, 09:05:32 PM »
Am I the only one who sees this as a fundamental issue with the integrity of the podcast?

Yes.

So how much does a seat on the panel for an episode cost?

Maybe I could buy one and join the panel to talk about Diet and Nutrition and the alternate hypothesis for an hour.

(I know they'd have other "topics" but I could bend any discussion around)

That sounds like fun!

/sarcasm

I’d pay for you to appear as a guest rogue to hear you trying to defend your low carbohydrate/high fat ketogenic diet.  That sounds like fun!

I doubt you’d pay for yourself to appear as a guest rogue though.  You’re too cheap to pay for a blood assay of ketones in order to see if you’re actually in nutritional ketosis.

Ha!  I am very cheap, but wouldn't pay for a seat on the panel anyway.

As for the other, WTF? Not only did I never say that, but I have indeed recently had bloodwork done that did indicate ketosis, and over the years I have purchased two ketone blood meters (which are significantly more expensive than glucose meters) and purchased a ketone breath meter.

And in case you're wondering, between the two meters, the breathalyzer and bloodwork with semi-annual checkups since I started this diet I have never once had a test show I was not in ketosis. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10