Funny Events of the "Woke" world

[Phoenixmgs]

You copied/pasted experts.... saying other things. None of them actually demonstrated what you claimed. None of them corroborated the conclusions you came to. You made the leap between what they did show/say and your own conclusions.

"Fat around the organs isn't required" =/= "no mechanical link between obesity and diabetes".

"Some experts think sugar is a cause of diabetes, others don't, there's lots we don't know" =/= "overeating sugar is definitely the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes".

OK? OK. Enough of this pathetic distraction. You explicitly said you could provide over 6 sources for your claim that overeating sugar is the sole and direct cause. I don't care if you don't value expert opinion: you're the one who claimed you could find those sources. Either provide them, or acknowledge that you can't.



...we're in modern times.

That was how you "proved" the mechanistic link between obesity and diabetes, not me. I debunked that, that doesn't mean there isn't another mechanistic link, I'm waiting on you to supply one.

That's currently the only logic that makes sense via the mechanisms we know about.

Waiting on your to concede the previous conversation...

Even in modern times, we don't know if a vegan diet is healthy.

That argument is incredibly stupid. They should at least have used an omnivore like a pig or even a chicken instead of a tiger when comparing to human.

That would also be way easier to test considering endangered species and animal rights. (There are certainly no extensive studies of vegan diets for tigers so this whole argument is based in you imagining how bad tofu is for a carnivore. But there sure are studies of varies diets of farm animals and how cheaply they can be fed without impacting health or growth.)

You do realize analogies don't have to literally be 1:1, right? We didn't do the studies on tigers but other animals. He was just using tiger as an example...

For most of humanity, if you venture out at night, you will be eaten by wolves or die of pneumonia or something. So going out at night is obviously pretty terrible.

When do you think most violent crimes and murders happen? Also, you can't get colds/pneumonia from the cold.

And yet even still mechanism has been claimed as sufficient to defend that sugar causes diabetes aone (despite a compelling mechanism being absent anyway), but mechanism is irrelevant to defend the usefulness of masks restricting the spread of covid, which can only be justified by randomised control trial.

I've already stated this... You guys don't read what I say or keep consistent logic. If you CAN do RCTs, then they should be done. You can't do RCTs for diabetes but you can for masks. If you can't do RCTs, then you have to go by mechanisms. The fact you think masks help slow the spread of airborne diseases is just completely ignoring all the science we have on masks just so "science" aligns with your worldview of things.

 

[Silvanus]

That was how you "proved" the mechanistic link between obesity and diabetes, not me.

That's what you asked for. You asked for evidence of a mechanical link between obesity and type 2 diabetes, so you you were given one.

But of course you made a claim going well beyond mechanics and said you had 6+ sources for it. You said you had sources for your claim that overeating sugar was the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes. It's now over 40 posts later and you've not given a single one.

That's currently the only logic that makes sense via the mechanisms we know about.

...according to your amateur analysis. But I don't care what you've concluded from your amateur bullshit. You said you had actual sources. So provide them, or admit you can't find any.

Even in modern times, we don't know if a vegan diet is healthy.

So: speculation.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

That's what you asked for. You asked for evidence of a mechanical link between obesity and type 2 diabetes, so you you were given one.

But of course you made a claim going well beyond mechanics and said you had 6+ sources for it. You said you had sources for your claim that overeating sugar was the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes. It's now over 40 posts later and you've not given a single one.



...according to your amateur analysis. But I don't care what you've concluded from your amateur bullshit. You said you had actual sources. So provide them, or admit you can't find any.



So: speculation.

I debunked you're mechanistic claim and you haven't countered or conceded that. Still waiting...

It wasn't my analysis, it was applying basic logic to known science.

Eat a diet known to keep you healthy or a diet unknown to keep you healthy. What makes the most sense to choose?

 

[Silvanus]

I debunked you're mechanistic claim and you haven't countered or conceded that.

Because again: you didn't debunk shit. You gave your own amateur analysis in response, to discount an actual source attesting a mechanical link. But your amateur analysis is worthless to me.

You said you had sources for your claim that overeating sugar was the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes. It's now over 40 posts later and you've not given a single one. Either provide them, or say that you can't.

It wasn't my analysis, it was applying basic logic to known science.

What you consider "basic logic", I see as unsubstantiated leaps. And lo and behold: zero actual experts corroborate the conclusions you've come to. So yeah, amateur analysis.

Eat a diet known to keep you healthy or a diet unknown to keep you healthy. What makes the most sense to choose?

Modern meat-eating diets are also unrecognisably different from the human diets for 99.9%+ of our time on earth.

Getting all the nutrients you need, and have no actual reason to expect adverse effects from your diet? Go right ahead with it then.

 

[Thaluikhain]

What you consider "basic logic", I see as unsubstantiated leaps.

Is "basic logic" the new "common sense"?

 

[Ag3ma]

Is "basic logic" the new "common sense"?

Let's just say that for a caveman it's basic logic that an earthquake or crop failure is caused by an angry god.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Because again: you didn't debunk shit. You gave your own amateur analysis in response, to discount an actual source attesting a mechanical link. But your amateur analysis is worthless to me.

You said you had sources for your claim that overeating sugar was the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes. It's now over 40 posts later and you've not given a single one. Either provide them, or say that you can't.



What you consider "basic logic", I see as unsubstantiated leaps. And lo and behold: zero actual experts corroborate the conclusions you've come to. So yeah, amateur analysis.



Modern meat-eating diets are also unrecognisably different from the human diets for 99.9%+ of our time on earth.

Getting all the nutrients you need, and have no actual reason to expect adverse effects from your diet? Go right ahead with it then.

The study literally said for insulin resistance, you don't need fat around the liver, it's the consumption of sugar that causes it. Thus, obesity doesn't matter.

If diabetes requires insulin resistance (which many sources say...), then stopping insulin resistance stops diabetes. Again, basic logic.

What are you talking about? What's the difference between modern meat eating diets now and before?

 

[Silvanus]

The study literally said for insulin resistance, you don't need fat around the liver, it's the consumption of sugar that causes it.

It said fat around the liver isn't required. That very obviously isn't the same as debunking any mechanical connection between obesity and diabetes. So: you haven't "debunked" shit. You asked for a source attesting a mechanical link and you got one, then wanted to discount it based on your own amateur assumptions.

Are you going to acknowledge that you can't find sources corroborating your actual claim, or gonna provide them? No? Still just gonna distract and ignore, 40+ posts later?

If diabetes requires insulin resistance (which many sources say...), then stopping insulin resistance stops diabetes. Again, basic logic.

This is also obviously not the same as your claim.

To remind you: you said that overeating sugar is the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes. I'm not interested in sources saying other stuff, from which you've made your own leaps.

What are you talking about? What's the difference between modern meat eating diets now and before?

Fucking lol.

 

[Satinavian]

Still just gonna distract and ignore, 40+ posts later?

Well, the answer should be very obvious by now.

 

[Gergar12]

What a shitshow. No wonder academically inclined students go to private schools and charter schools. When I was a progressive organizer with the Dennis Kunich Campaign for Ohio Governor (Yes that was dumb he's a pro-Russia idiot), multiple African-American parents told me they sent their students to charter schools in Columbus Ohio. There is a Hispanic-American parent that I talked to who also sent her daughter not to the urban school district but to Hillard City Schools a much better school district. And then many other parents who for whatever reason don't, or can't do that have to suffer culture wars created by the right are struck in under-funded, under-resourced, under-staffed, and under-reputation schools. In five years we may not even have public schools in the US. If you want an example of a culture war shitshow go to South-Western City School District where right-wing social conservatives are waging a war at the schools.

This isn't helpful to it. It paints pro-DEI teachers who a majority do want to help students of all races as racially biased, anti-white rabble-rousers.

The Meltdown at a Middle School in a Liberal Town

A post-pandemic fight about racism, the respectful treatment of trans kids, and the role of teachers’ unions has divided Amherst, Massachusetts.

www.newyorker.com

 

[Phoenixmgs]

It said fat around the liver isn't required. That very obviously isn't the same as debunking any mechanical connection between obesity and diabetes. So: you haven't "debunked" shit. You asked for a source attesting a mechanical link and you got one, then wanted to discount it based on your own amateur assumptions.

Are you going to acknowledge that you can't find sources corroborating your actual claim, or gonna provide them? No? Still just gonna distract and ignore, 40+ posts later?



This is also obviously not the same as your claim.

To remind you: you said that overeating sugar is the sole and direct cause of type 2 diabetes. I'm not interested in sources saying other stuff, from which you've made your own leaps.



Fucking lol.

With insulin resistance, no matter how much insulin the pancreas makes, it can't overcome the resistance. So the pancreas being hindered doesn't matter all that much. Are you going to acknowledge your mechanical connection is moot? Finish the prior conversation first.

If you cut out sugar, how does one then get diabetes?

So you can't answer then...

 

[Silvanus]

Are you going to acknowledge your mechanical connection is moot? Finish the prior conversation first.

Nope. Because you can quibble and moan and disbelieve the source I provided all you like, but the fact is I provided one directly corroborating what I said. I'm under no obligation to entertain your delusion that your own amateur opinion is sufficient to discount it.

So as we stand: in the "prior conversation", regarding mechanics, I gave you a corroborating source. You didn't like it, but there it is. Also gave 6 sources directly attesting what I said about sugar and diabetes. Again, you didn't like them, but there they are.

You said you could do the same. You said you could more than match them with ones corroborating what you said.

But you haven't. You can't, can you? If I had to guess, I'd say you've probably frantically tried to find some, and come up empty handed, so the last 40 posts have been feeble attempts to distract and equivocate. But that's where we stand.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

What a shitshow. No wonder academically inclined students go to private schools and charter schools. When I was a progressive organizer with the Dennis Kunich Campaign for Ohio Governor (Yes that was dumb he's a pro-Russia idiot), multiple African-American parents told me they sent their students to charter schools in Columbus Ohio. There is a Hispanic-American parent that I talked to who also sent her daughter not to the urban school district but to Hillard City Schools a much better school district. And then many other parents who for whatever reason don't, or can't do that have to suffer culture wars created by the right are struck in under-funded, under-resourced, under-staffed, and under-reputation schools. In five years we may not even have public schools in the US. If you want an example of a culture war shitshow go to South-Western City School District where right-wing social conservatives are waging a war at the schools.

This isn't helpful to it. It paints pro-DEI teachers who a majority do want to help students of all races as racially biased, anti-white rabble-rousers.

The Meltdown at a Middle School in a Liberal Town

A post-pandemic fight about racism, the respectful treatment of trans kids, and the role of teachers’ unions has divided Amherst, Massachusetts.

www.newyorker.com

That's too funny, it's like far-left liberals are robots that you can make explode with a simple logical paradox. Minority kids from poor neighborhoods have it bad so we can't punish them and can only use mediation and reconciliation. We must also protect trans kids as well. What happens when minority kids that have it bad bully trans kids? Looks like we can't do anything but tell them nicely not to bully them.

Nope. Because you can quibble and moan and disbelieve the source I provided all you like, but the fact is I provided one directly corroborating what I said. I'm under no obligation to entertain your delusion that your own amateur opinion is sufficient to discount it.

So as we stand: in the "prior conversation", regarding mechanics, I gave you a corroborating source. You didn't like it, but there it is. Also gave 6 sources directly attesting what I said about sugar and diabetes. Again, you didn't like them, but there they are.

You said you could do the same. You said you could more than match them with ones corroborating what you said.

But you haven't. You can't, can you? If I had to guess, I'd say you've probably frantically tried to find some, and come up empty handed, so the last 40 posts have been feeble attempts to distract and equivocate. But that's where we stand.

Do you not understand basic logic? Just because fat around the pancreas causes issues with said pancreas doesn't mean it's a direct cause to diabetes. I showed you a perfectly healthy pancreas can't create enough insulin to overcome bad insulin resistance. Funny how all the Supreme Court justices agreed with my basic interpretation of federal and state election law. When you gonna admit you were wrong on that?

 

[Silvanus]

Do you not understand [...]

Blah blah, more amateur analysis. Not interested.

Do you have those sources for what you said or not? You said you could easily provide over 6. Acknowledge that you can't find them.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Blah blah, more amateur analysis. Not interested.

Do you have those sources for what you said or not? You said you could easily provide over 6. Acknowledge that you can't find them.

It's not amateur analysis... Do you know what is amateur analysis? Your appeals to authority that don't know what they are talking about.

 

[Silvanus]

It's not amateur analysis... Do you know what is amateur analysis? Your appeals to authority that don't know what they are talking about.

OK. But you said you could provide just as many sources too. And you can't find any, can you?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

OK. But you said you could provide just as many sources too. And you can't find any, can you?

Again, we talked about mechanisms first, either counter or concede in that.

Can you not smell bullshit? The 1st article states “Type 2 Diabetes is more closely linked to genetic predisposition than to dietary habits like the consumption of sugar." The 2nd link is just diabetes cases from 1980 to 2022. Do you actually believe people's genetics have changed that much in 42 years that people are getting diabetes at such higher rates because of genetics?

Is it possible to get diabetes by not consuming sugar?

Doctors address the popular myth and spill the beans on whether it possible to get diabetes by not consuming sugar

www.hindustantimes.com

Number of people with diabetes in the U.S. 1980-2022 | Statista

As of 2022, over 24 million people in the United States had diabetes. The number of people in the U.S. with diabetes has increased in recent years.

www.statista.com

 

[Silvanus]

Again, we talked about mechanisms first, either counter or concede in that.

You know what's amusing? How you were more than happy to move on from that earlier. You were happy to make loads of subsequent claims, and promise sources for them.

It's only now that you've been challenged to actually provide them that you've decided, wait, you're unwilling to move on from this prior convo.

Almost as if this is just an excuse to avoid admitting that you can't provide a single one.

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

Is a long established legal precedent where I'm from that it is incumbent on those claiming to smell bullshit to check their own shoes first.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You know what's amusing? How you were more than happy to move on from that earlier. You were happy to make loads of subsequent claims, and promise sources for them.

It's only now that you've been challenged to actually provide them that you've decided, wait, you're unwilling to move on from this prior convo.

Almost as if this is just an excuse to avoid admitting that you can't provide a single one.

Because you never stay on point, and as I've said many times I'm not interested in what people say, I care about how things actually work. Where's your admittance of being wrong with the Trump ballot case?

Are you gonna start saying obese people are obese because of genetics because Dr. Fatima Cody Stanford said so and she's from the US government. Or can you just actually think for yourself?