4 ms·
Again spare me, someone has just 'discovered' grains are bad for you? What will they 'discover' next in the laboratory of nutrition? I'll take traditional ay
by amalag 14y ago
Again spare me, someone has just 'discovered' grains are bad for you? What will they 'discover' next in the laboratory of nutrition? I'll take traditional ayurvedic knowledge over this 'rigorous nutritional science initiative' chaired by the four hour body guru.
And i would rather eat a tablespoon of raw cane sugar than a tablespoon of bleached white sugar or laboratory grade high fructose corn syrup anyday. (we replaced white sugar with raw cane sugar in our house in spite of scientifically minded opinions that "it's till sugar")
In my worldview we were not dumped blindly into this world to use our senses and scientific knowledge to discover a better world. There is much traditional knowledge that is not discovered, but rather given to us that i am happy to follow instead of trying to discover the next best thing to hack my body.
I am not trying to be close minded, but I am doubting the efficacy of starting from scratch.
- seiji 14y agoOoops, sorry. I didn't realize I was engaging with someone kinda high on the Internet Crackpot Scale.
- amalag 14y agoYes because from my comments it is obvious I am delusional. I'll be sure to make sure my views coincide with your accepted world view before commenting next time.
- will_work4tears 14y agoYou don't believe in "evolution" Yep, delusional.
- alecdibble 14y agoThe reason why your argument doesn't make sense is because of optimization. Evolution is a process that has optimized our bodies to certain conditions. So, in theory, learning about traditional eating sounds like it would be the perfect answer. However, what we think of as "traditional" eating is not what our bodies are optimized for. Agriculture, grains, and cooking are a really new thing in the scale of human evolution. Thousands of years ago, humans started doing things and eating things that they hadn't before. What the studies (should) be trying to do is figure out what our bodies are optimized to eat. Additionally, it would be helpful to know if certain genetics adapted to different environments (foods) or if everyone roughly follows the same "optimization".
- amalag 14y agoI don't believe that we evolved from apes, sorry. edit, yes i realized later also the evolutinites have a common ancestor theory, so I should say: I don't believe that we evolved from a proto-mythical-man-ape, sorry.
- will_work4tears 14y agoWe didn't, Apes and us both descended from a common ancestor.
- alecdibble 14y agoOk, then let's take that part out of the argument. Either way, for a LONG time, humans ate one way. Once humans discovered agriculture and processing, they started eating completely differently. Most "traditional" knowledge comes from the latter period. Even if we were "created", I would assume we would be created with some kind of optimization for the environment we were created in.
- amalag 14y agoI don't agree with your version of human history in this ancient past of being of primitive's who 'discovered' agriculture. The knowledge of ayurveda (vedic health texts) and other vedic texts don't suggest they were primitives but rather people with advanced knowledge. In Vedic epistemology there are 3 ways to ascertain knowledge, your senses, inductive logic and hearing from an authority. There are detailed descriptions on the theory of food, medicine and the functioning of the body. The reductionist view of counting calories and chemicals in a laboratory will never come up to it's standard because the human body is far more complex.
- seiji 14y agoThe human body is more complex than science can explain?
- 14y ago