throwu444

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by throwu444 13y ago

   Same as smoking then?
2. 2.▲
   by throwu444 13y ago

   See my replies below regarding "not real science". I'm happy to accept your point in that regard. As for #1 and #2 - we've created a kibble/pellet formula for virtually every other animal on planet earth. Why not hu
3. 3.▲
   by throwu444 13y ago

   Perhaps my original statement was a bit strong. I guess I should say that our level of understanding is not proportionate to the types of conclusions we accept when it comes to food. Compared to our understand of fluid dynamics, our underst
4. 4.▲
   by throwu444 13y ago

   Yes, I think we are on the same page.
5. 5.▲
   by throwu444 13y ago

   because most people, myself included, don't really give a shit about that.
6. 6.▲
   by throwu444 13y ago

   Rubbish. Firstly, nutrition science is not real science - we don't have a full understanding of how our body processes foods, etc to be able to model it properly. So it's not real science. Secondly, having a balanced nutrition isn