4 ms·

The son of Roblox CEO had serious mental issues which were cured by going on a low carb diet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQWh_ofvziE https://www.youtube.c

The son of Roblox CEO had serious mental issues which were cured by going on a low carb diet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQWh_ofvziE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQWh_ofvziE Diet is extremely underrated, if not probably one of the main causes of mental illness (aside from severe chronic life stress). You can also check Chris Palmer on twitter.

Spod_Gaju 2y ago
I’m responding to you here because they flagged another post that you made a comment on. It was about the autoimmune diseases. I have no idea why they flagged that post are there than I wrote the article and I posted it as well. It was interesting to read the feedback with one person saying that because I am not a doctor. I can’t learn anything. And I appreciate what you’re saying here about mental illness because what you’re saying is true. If you go to my Substack, I’m going to talk more about how I use my genetics to discover the cause of my mental illness and how I’m using food to cure it as well as all the other disorders that came along with my mental illness. People have a hard time with creative intelligence and unlearning dogma that’s been taught to them for years. I was hoping in hacker news people would be more open-minded but now I’m seeing that’s not the case.
- NotGMan 2y ago
  Thanks :) >> I was hoping in hacker news people would be more open-minded but now I’m seeing that’s not the case. Yes this was a bitter pill to swallow for me also: hackers would be open minded right? It's exactly the opposite: many comments that I do like this get downvoted very often heh...more like Sheep News than Hacker News :) But I'm totaly used to it now, though my opinion that "programmers are be smart and wise people" now doesn't have the "wise" part in it anymore...
smokel 2y ago
> Diet is extremely underrated According to your comment, it is also extremely overrated. Diet is very complex, and the behaviours associated with it are very complex as well. It is very hard to tell causality from correlation in this context. If someone’s temporary mental problems are clearing up, there may be more room to improve eating habits, and if someone is riding a negative spiral, there might be just a little comfort in eating junk food. Of course we should study the relation between food and mental health more, but I sincerely doubt that reducing sugar intake will cure depression.
- NotGMan 2y ago
  >> but I sincerely doubt that reducing sugar intake will cure depression And yet you can find people whose depression went away after going low carb, search twitter and youtube.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - smokel 2y ago
    Yes, but those anecdotes don't prove much, do they? I prefer to take my scientific input from peer reviewed papers, not Twitter or YouTube. One random counterexample for your claim: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36584702/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36584702/
    - NotGMan 2y ago
      >> Yes, but those anecdotes don't prove much, do they? Are you sure? Because it's exactly REAL WORLD N=1 examples that clearly demonstrate that for some people these diets are akin to magic. How can you dismiss REAL WORLD EXAMPLES? Yes, they don't work for everyone: but so now people shouldn't try them just because some people don't get better on them? What kind of logic is that? Real world examples are all that matter! If it works: great, your problem is gone! If it doesn't: back to the drawing board!
      - smokel 2y ago
        I find that I have to repeat myself. You seem to be using a kind of reasoning that I don't think is very productive. Are you aware of this? I could spend some time explaining where I think you go off the rails, but I'm afraid you prefer trolling over learning. Please let me know if I'm mistaken, and I'd be happy to continue the conversation.
        NotGMan 2y ago
        Why are real world examples "counterproductive"? Do you not see that some people are healed by this? What is hard to understand about real world people healing? So because in a study of eg 200 people 170 don't improve at all but 30 do this now obviously means that on average the thing studied doesn't work: so the study concludes "X doesn't work" even thought 30 people got completely cured. So you'd now prefer for no-one to get cured because "on average" treatment X doesn't work. Perhaps your reasoning is not productive? It's really simple: these things work for SOME people: should they not have tried this and instead remain ill? A human life is not the average + confidence interval in a study: humans are different, an individual is a VERY REAL N=1, not "the average study participant".

Spod_Gaju 2y ago

I’m responding to you here because they flagged another post that you made a comment on. It was about the autoimmune diseases. I have no idea why they flagged that post are there than I wrote the article and I posted it as well. It was interesting to read the feedback with one person saying that because I am not a doctor. I can’t learn anything. And I appreciate what you’re saying here about mental illness because what you’re saying is true. If you go to my Substack, I’m going to talk more about how I use my genetics to discover the cause of my mental illness and how I’m using food to cure it as well as all the other disorders that came along with my mental illness. People have a hard time with creative intelligence and unlearning dogma that’s been taught to them for years. I was hoping in hacker news people would be more open-minded but now I’m seeing that’s not the case.

NotGMan 2y ago
Thanks :) >> I was hoping in hacker news people would be more open-minded but now I’m seeing that’s not the case. Yes this was a bitter pill to swallow for me also: hackers would be open minded right? It's exactly the opposite: many comments that I do like this get downvoted very often heh...more like Sheep News than Hacker News :) But I'm totaly used to it now, though my opinion that "programmers are be smart and wise people" now doesn't have the "wise" part in it anymore...

smokel 2y ago

> Diet is extremely underrated According to your comment, it is also extremely overrated. Diet is very complex, and the behaviours associated with it are very complex as well. It is very hard to tell causality from correlation in this context. If someone’s temporary mental problems are clearing up, there may be more room to improve eating habits, and if someone is riding a negative spiral, there might be just a little comfort in eating junk food. Of course we should study the relation between food and mental health more, but I sincerely doubt that reducing sugar intake will cure depression.

NotGMan 2y ago
>> but I sincerely doubt that reducing sugar intake will cure depression And yet you can find people whose depression went away after going low carb, search twitter and youtube.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- smokel 2y ago
  Yes, but those anecdotes don't prove much, do they? I prefer to take my scientific input from peer reviewed papers, not Twitter or YouTube. One random counterexample for your claim: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36584702/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36584702/
  - NotGMan 2y ago
    >> Yes, but those anecdotes don't prove much, do they? Are you sure? Because it's exactly REAL WORLD N=1 examples that clearly demonstrate that for some people these diets are akin to magic. How can you dismiss REAL WORLD EXAMPLES? Yes, they don't work for everyone: but so now people shouldn't try them just because some people don't get better on them? What kind of logic is that? Real world examples are all that matter! If it works: great, your problem is gone! If it doesn't: back to the drawing board!
    - smokel 2y ago
      I find that I have to repeat myself. You seem to be using a kind of reasoning that I don't think is very productive. Are you aware of this? I could spend some time explaining where I think you go off the rails, but I'm afraid you prefer trolling over learning. Please let me know if I'm mistaken, and I'd be happy to continue the conversation.
      - NotGMan 2y ago
        Why are real world examples "counterproductive"? Do you not see that some people are healed by this? What is hard to understand about real world people healing? So because in a study of eg 200 people 170 don't improve at all but 30 do this now obviously means that on average the thing studied doesn't work: so the study concludes "X doesn't work" even thought 30 people got completely cured. So you'd now prefer for no-one to get cured because "on average" treatment X doesn't work. Perhaps your reasoning is not productive? It's really simple: these things work for SOME people: should they not have tried this and instead remain ill? A human life is not the average + confidence interval in a study: humans are different, an individual is a VERY REAL N=1, not "the average study participant".