4 ms·

I don't understand why any comments in support of this article are being downvoted. Is it now politically incorrect to support agree with scientific studies? R

by qazpot 9y ago

I don't understand why any comments in support of this article are being downvoted. Is it now politically incorrect to support agree with scientific studies? Reminds me of climate change deniers.

ransom1538 9y ago
Yes it is hilarious. I posted the article to overwhelmingly large scientific community that acknowledges the link of saturated fats to heart disease - I have never been so downvoted. I am waiting for the bush did 911 comments. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat_and_cardiovascular_disease https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat_and_cardiovasc...
- vixen99 9y ago
  Discuss the arguments and the data not a consensus of opinions. Science isn't done that way. Not so long ago, margarine (industrially hydrogenated fat) was touted by a majority of recognized experts as a healthy option while butter and eggs were supposed to be the route to heart disease and stroke. Merely adopting a consensus view is a dice game.
  - chiefalchemist 9y ago
    But we've had the science. That is, we know that extra weight compromises the human system. For example, diabetes. This report isn't new. It's not a surprise. We already knew that if you make the body do something outside the norm of natural (e.g., smoking) the odds of bad things happening is going to increase. Sure it's nice to have micro proof of a cancer connextion. But at the macro level this is just new chapter in a pattern we've proven plenty of times before.
    - kbutler 9y ago
      So is long distance running natural? Periodic fasting? Living on no meat? Sitting on an elevated seat to defecate? Eating bananas in the wintertime? Or in non-tropical regions? Living surrounded by 1,000,000 other people? Sleeping in a heated (or air conditioned) room? Modern medical care when you're injured or ill? We really have no idea what "the norm of natural" would be. And some things that are not "natural" are clearly beneficial.
      - chiefalchemist 9y ago
        No idea? I'm not so sure that's true. As for not natural but beneficial, can you give an example? Or three?
        Godel_unicode 9y ago
        Off the top of my head; vaccines, vitamin pills, penicillin, and hip replacements.
        chiefalchemist 9y ago
        Well. I think hip replacements are not natural. The other three are just "man made" versions of things that readily exist(ed). But perhaps we have different definitions of natural :)
        kbutler 9y ago
        In addition to Godel_unicode's examples Purified drinking water. Mosquito nets Sewage systems Antiseptics in medical contexts Washing hands after using the restroom Lifting heavy things on a regular basis even though you don't have to.
        chiefalchemist 9y ago
        To me, Aspartame is unnatural. In that context, mosquito nets, sewage system, etc. are natural. Maybe we just have different definitions :) But to me, progress (i.e., human's reproducing existing patterns) doesn't necessarily equate to unnatural.
      - DrScump 9y ago
        So is long distance running natural? Periodic fasting? Yes, and yes[0]. In fact, the one competitive advantage in early man hunting game was endurance -- humans could outrun almost any game (including fast sprinters such as kudu) over long distances, partially because humans shed heat better. [0] http://news.usc.edu/82959/diet-that-mimics-fasting-appears-to-slow-aging/ http://news.usc.edu/82959/diet-that-mimics-fasting-appears-t...
chiefalchemist 9y ago
Ha. I don't understand why people need a formal study to understand the human body system 101. That is, compromise that system - which is what excess weight does - and (bad) things are going to happen. I mean if your infrastructure (e.g., bones, major organs, etc.) are designed to support a mass of X and you're more than 1.1 times that mass then there are going to be "side effects." And people wonder why healthcare costs are so high? Maybe that's because excess weight also compromises brain function. We've had all the science we need. What we lack is the ability to handle the truth.
odiroot 9y ago
Well, climate change science doesn't offend anyone. The science from the article does.
- Godel_unicode 9y ago
  This (ignoring facts one finds offensive) is a very serious problem in our society, does anyone know of research into how to work around it?
  - devonkim 9y ago
    Most of the research I’m familiar with is related to cognitive biases from areas related to political science or religious beliefs and it’s very obvious now that facts are not a way to get people to believe things that were initially spurred by emotional reasons. Most of the stuff I’ve seen basically says it’s impossible to get people to get past their cognitive dissonance problems without making something very personal that requires them to adapt or risk more or less a form of identity loss. In fact, facts may cause people to bank even more on their existing beliefs and seek out “alternative facts” that support their current beliefs. This is a similar mechanic to how some anti-LGBT politicians have relented on their publicly known positions when some of their immediate family members have come out as homosexual. This is not consistent either - many such persons are simply disowned by their families and in extreme cases of bigotry result in an honor killing. My personal, not-very tested belief is that there is a strong biological component to political alignments and if you put that person in a different culture they’d gravitate toward similar values on a relative scale.

by qazpot 9y ago

I don't understand why any comments in support of this article are being downvoted. Is it now politically incorrect to support agree with scientific studies? Reminds me of climate change deniers.

ransom1538 9y ago

Yes it is hilarious. I posted the article to overwhelmingly large scientific community that acknowledges the link of saturated fats to heart disease - I have never been so downvoted. I am waiting for the bush did 911 comments. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat_and_cardiovascular_disease https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat_and_cardiovasc...

vixen99 9y ago
Discuss the arguments and the data not a consensus of opinions. Science isn't done that way. Not so long ago, margarine (industrially hydrogenated fat) was touted by a majority of recognized experts as a healthy option while butter and eggs were supposed to be the route to heart disease and stroke. Merely adopting a consensus view is a dice game.
- chiefalchemist 9y ago
  But we've had the science. That is, we know that extra weight compromises the human system. For example, diabetes. This report isn't new. It's not a surprise. We already knew that if you make the body do something outside the norm of natural (e.g., smoking) the odds of bad things happening is going to increase. Sure it's nice to have micro proof of a cancer connextion. But at the macro level this is just new chapter in a pattern we've proven plenty of times before.
  - kbutler 9y ago
    So is long distance running natural? Periodic fasting? Living on no meat? Sitting on an elevated seat to defecate? Eating bananas in the wintertime? Or in non-tropical regions? Living surrounded by 1,000,000 other people? Sleeping in a heated (or air conditioned) room? Modern medical care when you're injured or ill? We really have no idea what "the norm of natural" would be. And some things that are not "natural" are clearly beneficial.
    - chiefalchemist 9y ago
      No idea? I'm not so sure that's true. As for not natural but beneficial, can you give an example? Or three?
      - Godel_unicode 9y ago
        Off the top of my head; vaccines, vitamin pills, penicillin, and hip replacements.
        chiefalchemist 9y ago
        Well. I think hip replacements are not natural. The other three are just "man made" versions of things that readily exist(ed). But perhaps we have different definitions of natural :)
      - kbutler 9y ago
        In addition to Godel_unicode's examples Purified drinking water. Mosquito nets Sewage systems Antiseptics in medical contexts Washing hands after using the restroom Lifting heavy things on a regular basis even though you don't have to.
        chiefalchemist 9y ago
        To me, Aspartame is unnatural. In that context, mosquito nets, sewage system, etc. are natural. Maybe we just have different definitions :) But to me, progress (i.e., human's reproducing existing patterns) doesn't necessarily equate to unnatural.
    - DrScump 9y ago
      So is long distance running natural? Periodic fasting? Yes, and yes[0]. In fact, the one competitive advantage in early man hunting game was endurance -- humans could outrun almost any game (including fast sprinters such as kudu) over long distances, partially because humans shed heat better. [0] http://news.usc.edu/82959/diet-that-mimics-fasting-appears-to-slow-aging/ http://news.usc.edu/82959/diet-that-mimics-fasting-appears-t...

chiefalchemist 9y ago

Ha. I don't understand why people need a formal study to understand the human body system 101. That is, compromise that system - which is what excess weight does - and (bad) things are going to happen. I mean if your infrastructure (e.g., bones, major organs, etc.) are designed to support a mass of X and you're more than 1.1 times that mass then there are going to be "side effects." And people wonder why healthcare costs are so high? Maybe that's because excess weight also compromises brain function. We've had all the science we need. What we lack is the ability to handle the truth.

odiroot 9y ago

Well, climate change science doesn't offend anyone. The science from the article does.

Godel_unicode 9y ago
This (ignoring facts one finds offensive) is a very serious problem in our society, does anyone know of research into how to work around it?
- devonkim 9y ago
  Most of the research I’m familiar with is related to cognitive biases from areas related to political science or religious beliefs and it’s very obvious now that facts are not a way to get people to believe things that were initially spurred by emotional reasons. Most of the stuff I’ve seen basically says it’s impossible to get people to get past their cognitive dissonance problems without making something very personal that requires them to adapt or risk more or less a form of identity loss. In fact, facts may cause people to bank even more on their existing beliefs and seek out “alternative facts” that support their current beliefs. This is a similar mechanic to how some anti-LGBT politicians have relented on their publicly known positions when some of their immediate family members have come out as homosexual. This is not consistent either - many such persons are simply disowned by their families and in extreme cases of bigotry result in an honor killing. My personal, not-very tested belief is that there is a strong biological component to political alignments and if you put that person in a different culture they’d gravitate toward similar values on a relative scale.