Hacker News Reader

Comment by tkyjonathan | Hacker News Reader

There are a number of fallacies in your statement. 1) Western societies are large populations that eat meat and eat meat more than other large populations, by far.

2) Inuits live 10 on average less than the local nearby populations and 900 year old Inuit mummies also show signs of advanced osteoporosis.

3) Processed sugar is not a health product and is not the polar opposite of meat. It is in the same category of meat as 'unhealthy' and 'causes inflammation'

4) A whole-foods low-GI plant-based diet has been show to open up arteries and that is important for Alzheimers as people with that disease do show blocked arteries to the brain post-mortem. So while not a 100% prevention, it certainly reduces risk and may even reverse issues.

View on HN

The "pro meat" (or should I say "meat health and environmental damage negationists") circle jerk on HN is sure strong, looking at your post and below's slowly fading away. I'm amazed everytime how the majority here, people who seem in other conditions able of logical reasoning, are just impermeable to unpleasant facts. You bring up good arguments.

So the tens of thousands of people who have successfully used a keto diet to induce autophagy and lose weight are all just.. making it up, in your mind?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2716748/

Maybe you should admit it's a bit more complicated than you seem to realize.

Does keto diets have anything to do with the arguments presented by above poster, that could explain the downvotes ? Did I mention keto diets ? What is your point ?

"Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patients".. read the first line. Its 16-24 weeks. Thats not exactly long term. Also, the study was done for people at home, not in a clinical ward.

Try this 8 year study instead https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20592131 Or if you want a long term RCT, try this 74 week one: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19339401

Discussing a "circle jerk" (not a term consistent with the standards of discussion here) amongst an unnamed deluded majority that "seems to" exist is a rhetorical strategy that I will downvote, despite my generally vegetarian/sustainable meat consumption leanings

Do you have another explanation as to why the post which I responded to is solidly downvoted, with no answer or contest of its arguments which could explain this phenomenon ?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com