3 ms·

An appeal to history is not the same as an appeal to nature. Traditional diets and foodstuffs aren't necessarily optimal, but they do evidence themselves as ad

An appeal to history is not the same as an appeal to nature. Traditional diets and foodstuffs aren't necessarily optimal, but they do evidence themselves as adequate for sustaining a community for some number of centuries. Novel diets and foodstuffs don't have that benefit, and are often accepted into daily life on a weakly evidenced hunch that its "safe until proven otherwise" and an often unevidenced assumption that it must at least be better than whatever imperfect thing its replacing. Choosing not to hop onto the hype train for every new novelty is a personal choice, but a decidedly reasonable one. In the case of sugars and sugar substitutes, adhering to a traditional pattern simply means treating sweetness as a luxury and accent rather than a daily staple. Not a big ask for people who mean to care about their health (not everyone needs to).

Eisenstein 2y ago
> An appeal to history is not the same as an appeal to nature. Would it surprise you to know that as recently as 1850 in the USA 50% of all children died before the age of 5? Does that change your opinion of how well people were doing in 'history'? > Novel diets and foodstuffs don't have that benefit, and are often accepted into daily life on a weakly evidenced hunch that its "safe until proven otherwise" and an often unevidenced assumption that it must at least be better than whatever imperfect thing its replacing. Can you explain what you mean by this in relation to xylitol? It is not a 'fad' or 'novel' diet. > In the case of sugars and sugar substitutes, adhering to a traditional pattern simply means treating sweetness as a luxury and accent rather than a daily staple. Not a big ask for people who mean to care about their health (not everyone needs to). I assume that you eat wild game and refrain from non-local and out of season ingredients as well?
glimshe 2y ago
Please note that traditional century-old diets have a great track record of sustaining communities, but it's not necessarily the case that the old diets can lead to long lifespans given our current levels of food availability. For instance, my grandmother used to tell me that I needed sugar to grow strong, so she added a ton of it to my milk when I was little. Refined sugar wasn't as readily available, or equally cheap, a long time ago so the small amounts of sugar that made sense in the past doesn't make sense today. She meant well, but the old knowledge unfortunately ended up creating a perverse incentive. What you are saying makes complete sense, but it's important to have in mind that when going all-in with "traditional" foods, one still needs to worry about overall intake - the century-old foods can still kill you if your diet isn't balanced.

Eisenstein 2y ago

> An appeal to history is not the same as an appeal to nature. Would it surprise you to know that as recently as 1850 in the USA 50% of all children died before the age of 5? Does that change your opinion of how well people were doing in 'history'? > Novel diets and foodstuffs don't have that benefit, and are often accepted into daily life on a weakly evidenced hunch that its "safe until proven otherwise" and an often unevidenced assumption that it must at least be better than whatever imperfect thing its replacing. Can you explain what you mean by this in relation to xylitol? It is not a 'fad' or 'novel' diet. > In the case of sugars and sugar substitutes, adhering to a traditional pattern simply means treating sweetness as a luxury and accent rather than a daily staple. Not a big ask for people who mean to care about their health (not everyone needs to). I assume that you eat wild game and refrain from non-local and out of season ingredients as well?

glimshe 2y ago

Please note that traditional century-old diets have a great track record of sustaining communities, but it's not necessarily the case that the old diets can lead to long lifespans given our current levels of food availability. For instance, my grandmother used to tell me that I needed sugar to grow strong, so she added a ton of it to my milk when I was little. Refined sugar wasn't as readily available, or equally cheap, a long time ago so the small amounts of sugar that made sense in the past doesn't make sense today. She meant well, but the old knowledge unfortunately ended up creating a perverse incentive. What you are saying makes complete sense, but it's important to have in mind that when going all-in with "traditional" foods, one still needs to worry about overall intake - the century-old foods can still kill you if your diet isn't balanced.