i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
You believe that a severe diet can get results over the long term, is what you're saying?
I am reading a book by an endocrinologist that argues against that idea. He is arguing that a sharp increase in natural fiber from food (not from processed foods, supplements, or store-bought bread), sharp decrease in fructose consumption, and moderate exercise, will pay off.
organichu can you be the pete campbell to my don draper
from my recollection of season 1, i... am not comfortable with this dynamic
just for that i've demoted you to harry crane
0
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
I don't know if you can be "anti science reactionary" with regards to skepticism about fad diets, given that fad diets are almost always based in ludicrous understandings of dietary science.
+1
kaleeditySometimes science is more art than scienceRegistered Userregular
oop, there's a gun story on Drudge! A Texas district attorney shot multiple times in front of a courthouse. Interesting.
Every page and file is tagged with an office location and a department. Every employee is assigned a primary office and a department.
If you are in Sales in Dallas, TX, and you log into the Intranet, the very first thing you will see is a list of files for Salespeople in Dallas. (This includes any files that do not specify a state or department.)
If you want to see the files associated with another department, there's a menu on the left of all departments, states, and miscellaneous keywords (like 'benefits').
And there's a search bar in the upper right corner.
Our HR manager cannot. figure. this. out. She is just so confused by the whole concept and over the last few months has asked me the same basic questions over and over again.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
+2
TehSlothHit Or MissI Guess They Never Miss, HuhRegistered Userregular
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
Organichu on
+2
TehSlothHit Or MissI Guess They Never Miss, HuhRegistered Userregular
Every page and file is tagged with an office location and a department. Every employee is assigned a primary office and a department.
If you are in Sales in Dallas, TX, and you log into the Intranet, the very first thing you will see is a list of files for Salespeople in Dallas. (This includes any files that do not specify a state or department.)
If you want to see the files associated with another department, there's a menu on the left of all departments, states, and miscellaneous keywords (like 'benefits').
And there's a search bar in the upper right corner.
Our HR manager cannot. figure. this. out. She is just so confused by the whole concept and over the last few months has asked me the same basic questions over and over again.
Should've done more UX testing dawg. Not enough card sorting.
Every page and file is tagged with an office location and a department. Every employee is assigned a primary office and a department.
If you are in Sales in Dallas, TX, and you log into the Intranet, the very first thing you will see is a list of files for Salespeople in Dallas. (This includes any files that do not specify a state or department.)
If you want to see the files associated with another department, there's a menu on the left of all departments, states, and miscellaneous keywords (like 'benefits').
And there's a search bar in the upper right corner.
Our HR manager cannot. figure. this. out. She is just so confused by the whole concept and over the last few months has asked me the same basic questions over and over again.
Oh my god I want someone to do this to our intranet.
But it is a battleground of petty fiefdoms over which "content owners" hold sway and it is impossible to find, verify or update anything.
I don't know if you can be "anti science reactionary" with regards to skepticism about fad diets, given that fad diets are almost always based in ludicrous understandings of dietary science.
umm this article on paleo diets says otherwise
0
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
I don't know if you can be "anti science reactionary" with regards to skepticism about fad diets, given that fad diets are almost always based in ludicrous understandings of dietary science.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
It is the burden of the wackadoodles (because it's almost never actually scientists, but money hungry failures looking to cash in) to make a strong positive case that their fad diet has a real effect above and beyond a placebo.
The default reaction should be disbelief until such a strong positive scientific case is made.
Attacked by tweeeeeeees!
+1
Deebaseron my way to work in a suit and a tieAhhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered Userregular
Every page and file is tagged with an office location and a department. Every employee is assigned a primary office and a department.
If you are in Sales in Dallas, TX, and you log into the Intranet, the very first thing you will see is a list of files for Salespeople in Dallas. (This includes any files that do not specify a state or department.)
If you want to see the files associated with another department, there's a menu on the left of all departments, states, and miscellaneous keywords (like 'benefits').
And there's a search bar in the upper right corner.
Our HR manager cannot. figure. this. out. She is just so confused by the whole concept and over the last few months has asked me the same basic questions over and over again.
Should've done more UX testing dawg. Not enough card sorting.
I did a little bit of informal UX testing before launch and incorporated feedback from management.
She was just as confused then and I worked with her on it and she seemed to get it, so I launched, and then she came back to me with exactly the same questions.
I should have quizzed her or something.
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
I basically work of the assumption that anything that The Daily Mail has run a feature on is probably nonsense. All else considered.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
It is the burden of the wackadoodles (because it's almost never actually scientists, but money hungry failures looking to cash in) to make a strong positive case that their fad diet has a real effect above and beyond a placebo.
The default reaction should be disbelief until such a strong positive scientific case is made.
He's saying disbelief without consideration is pointless, as there is no basis for disbelief when you haven't learned anything beyond it being a fad diet.
"It's just calories in and calories out" seems to be pretty wrong on all sorts of levels.
100 calories of sugar is not going to be handled the same way by your body as 100 calories of protein.
Different people are different and digestion is a complex process but pains have gone into assigning the calorie values to compensate for that. That's the ultimate goal of the calorie content metric.
Thousands of hot, local singles are waiting to play at bubbulon.com.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
I would agree that some people are dickbagglers about new diets. But I would not agree that fad diets, as they constantly exist in our world, should be greeted with anything other than a massive amount of "seriously?"
If your diet idea can be boiled down to a certain kind of food, it's probably nonsense.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
It is the burden of the wackadoodles (because it's almost never actually scientists, but money hungry failures looking to cash in) to make a strong positive case that their fad diet has a real effect above and beyond a placebo.
The default reaction should be disbelief until such a strong positive scientific case is made.
the current wave of people i see on message boards and blogs discussing this topic do not seem like they would be affected by a 'strong positive scientific case'. it is scientific exceptionalism: this theory is right because it's what's popular when i was 25 and learning about the topic.
i'm not saying that we should fund studies on the grapefruit diet or the cabbage diet or the apple-cider-vinegar-and-then-throw-up-and-then-shit-and-then-throw-up-on-your-shit-and-mix-it-with-vinegar-and-enema-it diet, but if a meaningful, well supported idea was proposed right now there are a bunch of people who wouldn't give it a listen because it's not their thing, this idea they've argued for and gotten used to.
Britfolk: Charlie Brooker on BBC2 in a few minutes!
0
ThomamelasOnly one man can kill this many Russians. Bring his guitar to me! Registered Userregular
I remember basketball in middle school. Space clearing around me when I would go for a rebound because I was unafraid to use my elbows. Also I was the kid in my grade who hit puberty early.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
hating on fad diets is the exact opposite of "anti-science" chu'. Fad diets are themselves anti-science.
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
It is the burden of the wackadoodles (because it's almost never actually scientists, but money hungry failures looking to cash in) to make a strong positive case that their fad diet has a real effect above and beyond a placebo.
The default reaction should be disbelief until such a strong positive scientific case is made.
the current wave of people i see on message boards and blogs discussing this topic do not seem like they would be affected by a 'strong positive scientific case'. it is scientific exceptionalism: this theory is right because it's what's popular when i was 25 and learning about the topic.
i'm not saying that we should fund studies on the grapefruit diet or the cabbage diet or the apple-cider-vinegar-and-then-throw-up-and-then-shit-and-then-throw-up-on-your-shit-and-mix-it-with-vinegar-and-enema-it diet, but if a meaningful, well supported idea was proposed right now there are a bunch of people who wouldn't give it a listen because it's not their thing, this idea they've argued for and gotten used to.
and those people would be absolutely 100% correct
just having an anecdotal effect on weight loss isn't enough. you need well designed studies showing how it differs from a placebo or there should be no reason for anyone in the public to even give you the time of day.
i too have Opinions about weight loss but they're controversial :v
rilly
i generally disagree with the idea that anything more than a moderate diet is sabotaging your chances (not in terms of compliance, but physiologically). i think the claims about metabolic retarding from large calorie deficits are overstated, especially for people who are very heavy. i also think that it's really dumb how so many people are going to an almost anti-science reactionary mode in response to whatever new wave of fad diets.
You believe that a severe diet can get results over the long term, is what you're saying?
i'm saying that if a 350 lb dude eats 1,300 calories a day instead of 1,800, his body won't be convinced he's starving and shut down all weight loss.
Posts
This seems entirely reasonable.
You believe that a severe diet can get results over the long term, is what you're saying?
I am reading a book by an endocrinologist that argues against that idea. He is arguing that a sharp increase in natural fiber from food (not from processed foods, supplements, or store-bought bread), sharp decrease in fructose consumption, and moderate exercise, will pay off.
he taught us how to play rugby and how to juggle
he answered the difficult questions in sex ed (which im sure is super, duper awkward.)
he also taught me how to highjump which i did through high school
just for that i've demoted you to harry crane
Every page and file is tagged with an office location and a department. Every employee is assigned a primary office and a department.
If you are in Sales in Dallas, TX, and you log into the Intranet, the very first thing you will see is a list of files for Salespeople in Dallas. (This includes any files that do not specify a state or department.)
If you want to see the files associated with another department, there's a menu on the left of all departments, states, and miscellaneous keywords (like 'benefits').
And there's a search bar in the upper right corner.
Our HR manager cannot. figure. this. out. She is just so confused by the whole concept and over the last few months has asked me the same basic questions over and over again.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I will, but only if I get to impregnate Trudy.
twitch.tv/tehsloth
it's not the hating on fad diets that is the problem. stupid shit should be called stupid. it's the reactionary refusal to look at anything other than the current dominant mantra- which is, i think, in part a response to the wave of dumb fad diets. i think a healthy, intellectual perspective ought to critically look at whatever's presented and not just go "well look, some new stuff that's popular with soccer moms is dumb so let's just reiterate the exclusive primacy of what we've been saying so far". eventually- in 5 years or 50 or whatever- we will make some more useful breakthroughs in physiology and i don't want people to just go LALALA FUCK THE GRAPEFRUIT DIET I DON'T BUY THIS NEW BULLSHIT, without examining whatever comes. and that is what happens with a lot of internet weight loss commentators: it's just calories in and calories out, "anything else you hear is bullshit and doesn't matter", which strikes me as decidedly anti-science and anti-intellectual
Should've done more UX testing dawg. Not enough card sorting.
twitch.tv/tehsloth
Oh my god I want someone to do this to our intranet.
But it is a battleground of petty fiefdoms over which "content owners" hold sway and it is impossible to find, verify or update anything.
100 calories of sugar is not going to be handled the same way by your body as 100 calories of protein.
umm this article on paleo diets says otherwise
*drops donut monocle
It is the burden of the wackadoodles (because it's almost never actually scientists, but money hungry failures looking to cash in) to make a strong positive case that their fad diet has a real effect above and beyond a placebo.
The default reaction should be disbelief until such a strong positive scientific case is made.
fuck you
I did a little bit of informal UX testing before launch and incorporated feedback from management.
She was just as confused then and I worked with her on it and she seemed to get it, so I launched, and then she came back to me with exactly the same questions.
I should have quizzed her or something.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I basically work of the assumption that anything that The Daily Mail has run a feature on is probably nonsense. All else considered.
Donucle.
When I read you saying this
I thought pe = private equity teacher
This
A new way to be let down in the world of dating!
I set new records every day GET ON MY LEVEL
He's saying disbelief without consideration is pointless, as there is no basis for disbelief when you haven't learned anything beyond it being a fad diet.
Well, yes. Five year olds need to learn finance, the sooner you start your retirement portfolio the better.
one of them insisted on doing that whole "why is there sports on it's fucking stupid oh look he kicked the ball yay we should be happy" thing
christ I fucking hate when people do that
Different people are different and digestion is a complex process but pains have gone into assigning the calorie values to compensate for that. That's the ultimate goal of the calorie content metric.
white peopleeeee
*raises black fist in solidarity*
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
I would agree that some people are dickbagglers about new diets. But I would not agree that fad diets, as they constantly exist in our world, should be greeted with anything other than a massive amount of "seriously?"
If your diet idea can be boiled down to a certain kind of food, it's probably nonsense.
the current wave of people i see on message boards and blogs discussing this topic do not seem like they would be affected by a 'strong positive scientific case'. it is scientific exceptionalism: this theory is right because it's what's popular when i was 25 and learning about the topic.
i'm not saying that we should fund studies on the grapefruit diet or the cabbage diet or the apple-cider-vinegar-and-then-throw-up-and-then-shit-and-then-throw-up-on-your-shit-and-mix-it-with-vinegar-and-enema-it diet, but if a meaningful, well supported idea was proposed right now there are a bunch of people who wouldn't give it a listen because it's not their thing, this idea they've argued for and gotten used to.
where is the milkman, quid?
why are you chanus
you back dude?
solidarity with white people, I would assume.
Maybe. I will probably not post as much as I did before.
and those people would be absolutely 100% correct
just having an anecdotal effect on weight loss isn't enough. you need well designed studies showing how it differs from a placebo or there should be no reason for anyone in the public to even give you the time of day.
i'm saying that if a 350 lb dude eats 1,300 calories a day instead of 1,800, his body won't be convinced he's starving and shut down all weight loss.