phonypc

He's also been credulously spreading nonsense about ivermectin and vaccine adverse events. Not someone worth listening to.

FWIW, he's also not a medical doctor. Not that he explicitly claims to be, but presenting medical information with a "Dr." in front of your name and no M.D. or Ph.D in a medically relevant field is kinda sketchy.

It does actually, but that wasn't really my point in referring to it. More that the GP post misrepresenting the study isn't justified by other evidence of a lack of rigour in the field.

Freezing doesn't kill bacteria. Reliably, anyway.

No, adding concentrated juice definitely violates "no added sugar" labelling standards, at least as far as the FDA and Health Canada are concerned for sure. I assume in Europe as well.

Some juices are just naturally very high in sugar.

There's evidence that wine judging is less objective than most people involved in it seem to believe. I'm not sure that justifies calling it nonsense, or misrepresenting a study as showing that experienced people can't even distinguish white from red.

Might want to refresh your reading on this. AFAIK this is reference to one (unpublished) study where undergrad wine science students tended to choose from a list of descriptive terms usually associated with red wine to refer to dyed white wine, most of the time.

It's certainly true that suggestion can change ones perception of wine (or any flavor), but I don't think it's clear that it's the primary factor.

The sound is expanding gas escaping their shell. They don't have lungs or vocal cords.

If you can't safely split a lobster with your kitchen knife, you probably shouldn't be cutting carrots either. It's not hard.

That stress / lactic acid / meat quality relationship only really applies to meat that's going to be aged, and it's as much about preventing microbial spoilage as anything.

There's no time for it to be a factor for lobster, which is going to be alive or frozen until right before you cook it.

The wasp is completely digested. You're no more eating a wasp when eating a fig, than you are eating grass when eating beef.

If you want to expand the category "bugs" to include all arthropods, then "crabs and lobsters are basically bugs" is kinda circular/superfluous.

My comparison at that point would become "humans and zebras are basically chordates"... which is true but not very meaningful in context.

>Crabs and lobsters are basically bugs

Not really. You might as well say humans are basically zebras.

Nearly everyone has recent ancestors that lived on a farm and loved playing with the animals. Once they were old enough to connect the dots and later saw the butchering process, they remained omnivores for the rest of their lives.

Palm oil isn't really in the same category as the vegetable oils that have had concern raised about them recently. It's not from a seed, so doesn't need a highly involved process to get meaningful amounts of it. Cold pressed palm oil has been in use for thousands of years. It's more like olive oil in this regard. (Of course, you can still refine it, and it often is refined. But it's not as easily oxidized as oils with a higher proportion of polyunsaturated fatty acids, so less concerning in that regard.)

There's some amount of palmitic acid in pretty much every dietary fat. Animal sources tend to be higher than seed oils, but e.g. olive oil, that many people like to tout as the healthiest, is something like 10-20% palmitic acid.

It's also the most abundant fatty acid in you, even if you don't eat any.

There's also a skeleton inside you right now! Spooky.

If foxes are amoral agents, why is it immoral to kill them?

That's walking pace though. Humans probably compare even less favourably to other animals if you open it up to the ability to walk marathon distance.

Presumably most people doing it have losing weight as a goal, not maintaining?

Anyway, fat heavy foods make cramming calories pretty easy. You can hide a lot of butter in mashed potatoes or a pasta sauce.

FWIW, this isn't atypical. IF in a scientific study pretty much always means some form of 24h+ fast. The more common practice of eating in a time window is usually "time-restricted eating/feeding."

IME, most people find it rather easy to take in a days worth of calories in a single sitting, with the right (wrong?) kinds of food.

Like... a largish portion of very cheesy mac 'n' cheese will do it.

Odd title. Study doesn't mention any anti-inflammatory response. The change in hsCRP in Table 3 actually seems to show a (non-significant) pro-inflammatory measure.

The low smoke point makes it perhaps impractical to cook with at high temperature if you don't have good ventilation. But the "good properties" (antioxidants) mean it's probably the best high temperature veg oil, oxidation being the primary issue with veg oil.

Might want to refresh your understanding here. You've confused oils, amino acids, fatty acids and essential acids of each kind.

The only essential fatty acids are linoleic and alpha-linolenic. It's virtually impossible to be deficient on anything like a normal diet. Oils/fats contain effectively no amino acids, essential or otherwise.

I would call both olive oil and coconut oil moderate sources of palmitic acid. It's present in greater proportion than in most other vegetable oils, but substantially less than in animal fats and palm oil.

Re: seaweed and supplements, you're thinking of DHA, which is non-essential but probably beneficial to consume in amounts greater than can be synthesized. Seaweeds however, containing very little fat overall, are not a very good source.

Palmitic acid is a major component of pretty much all fat containing food.

I guess we just have different reads on history. I don't think it's a mistake to view hard times as the default for most of history in most places. They were of course not constant and there are accounts of exceptionally hard times. But I think the background level of hardship for the common person throughout the world >1000 years ago would probably drive most people currently living in the modern first-world to catatonia or suicide.

Hence the "predators and inclement weather". You can't imagine experiencing "burnout" with regards to incessant cold and rain preventing your tribe from effectively hunting/foraging? Or a pack of starving wolves harassing your camp at night for weeks?

You don't actually have to be in conditions of siege or famine for them to be stressful. They merely have to be a threat. And what would a common person (i.e. peasant) have been able to do about that threat?

If your village is raided and you escape harm (quite the assumption), why would you generally return to "baseline"? What if the raiders took all your food and you can't feed your family? What if your family was murdered or raped? What if your village was destroyed and you're now a vagrant?

Like x000 years ago when war and famine were always looming threats? Or further back when predators and inclement weather were?

I can't imagine life in the distant past being less stressful.

I don't understand. Yes, many of the vaccine effectiveness studies are limited by the window of time they use. That's a separate issue from vaccines being redundant for previously infected people. Studies show that previously infected people still benefit from vaccination.

I'm perhaps being hyperbolic when I say widely criticized, but here's one critical take: https://twitter.com/DGBassani/status/1431390188924768269

Or take a quote from this article: https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-on...

>“The biggest limitation in the study is that testing [for SARS-CoV-2 infection] is still a voluntary thing—it’s not part of the study design.” That means, she says, that comparisons could be confounded if, for example, previously infected people who developed mild symptoms were less likely to get tested than vaccinated people, perhaps because they think they are immune.

I don't think your point 2. should be taken for granted. From the conclusion of the contested study:

>Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.