3 ms·
>A score higher than 1.0 indicated that more of the beverage remained in the body as compared to water, while a score lower than 1.0 indicated a higher excretio
by upofadown 10y ago
>A score higher than 1.0 indicated that more of the beverage remained in the body as compared to water, while a score lower than 1.0 indicated a higher excretion rate than water.
Then solid foods that need to be digested to get out the water would score even higher on this index. Condoms full of water would have an infinite score as the water would never show up in the urine. What I am saying here is that this is a stupid way to measure "hydration".
Speaking of stupid, why does HN have so many of these pointless diet things on the front page?
- colechristensen 10y ago>Speaking of stupid, why does HN have so many of these pointless diet things on the front page? People are really interested in their health. Lots of "hackers" would be super-interested in information that gave them conscious and definite ways to improve themselves. The problem is that there's very little real information out there. This study, if were framed properly, would have been at least mildly interesting. Stomach emptying of fluids depends on the type of fluid... urination frequency too. Thirsty but don't want to pee all the time on a road trip or hacking marathon? Drink milk! Hack your body! But instead they had to link it with "hydration" which is bollocks. It's not clear that anyone should care at all about hydration unless vigorous exercise or extreme heat is involved because your kidneys do a pretty good job, period.
- ebbv 10y agoTech folks as a general rule are extremely ignorant about nutrition and health and tend to believe anything that seems science-y. Unfortunately.
- the_duke 10y agoI find that most information in the media concerning health, nutrition and exercise comes from "experts" with no clue about (and no formal training in) physiology. Most Biology or Medicine students would know most of the information to be false. The problems are that -) human physiology is incredibly complex, and while we are making a lot of progress in understanding all the biological systems, we are far from a point where we can properly model all that goes on. -) Most people with an actual idea are far too busy doing proper research. They don't care about educating the public that much. And those who do usually want to sell something, in one way or another.
- Aelinsaar 10y agoBecause hard-science people sometimes forget just what a pack of horse dung some of the soft-"sciences" really are.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y agoIs physiology a "soft" science now?
- JustSomeNobody 10y agoBecause HNers are susceptible to pseudoscience and half truths as much as the next person.