If DeSantis wins

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,921
784
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Nope. You said it means it's garbage. Now you're trying to walk back absolute statements.

You specifically said carbs in general. Now you're trying to walk back absolute statements.

You literally said it's how we ate "historically" and that breakfast is bullshit. Now you're trying to walk back absolute statements.

Exactly, which is why the issue is highly processed foods and not a particular macronutrient (fat, protein, carbohydrates because I am genuinely starting to doubt you know what a macronutrient is) because we've been eating them in some for or another for our entire existence.

Why are they bad for you? The reason health bodies say they are bad is that they raise LDL cholestorol and lower HDL.
The only reason to believe that is believing that what you consume does in fact affect blood LDL. Which you already said isn't true. Also why did it take me like 4 pages of asking for you to finally answer that? I have the decency to respond to every point you make. You keep ignoring half my posts.


Again you have just demonstrated that the guidelines were misunderstood by the public and corporations. Not that the guidelines were wrong.

I'm sure you can get real bread in America. And I'm doubly certain that that's what the food pyramid meant.

I told you. GP's are twats who think they're smarter than they are. They see the "general" in their title and think it allows them to speak on a range of topica when really it means they're in no way specialised and have a very limited scope of care.


And I said that that is hilarious because you claim to just follow the science but really you just believe what a clown on YouTube told you because it sounds about right to you. And I still stand by that. It is hilarious.

All of the absolute claims that I pointed out that you're now trying to walk back and pretend you didn't say or didn't mean the way you said them.

An entire macronutrient, one that can lead to flu like symptoms after a couple of days if cut too low. Take it you didn't google kwto flu then.

Most dietitians and nutritionists would work with you to build a better relationship with and understanding of the food you eat. Not just try and eliminate things. Also, vwry funny that you're encouraging following general guidelines now. 😂😂

Yup and this is a prime example of one. Your complete ignorance of diet and nutrition makes you feel more confident speaking on it with authority than people who have more formal training because their training has taught them the limit of their scope of practice. But you'll spout nonsense with balls out confidence. It's very funny.

No you don't. You want belly scratches and to be told you're a smart little soldier.

Where? Pretty sure I said you don't know what a healthy person is.

Because you want to? It has exactly as nuch scientific backing as Intermittent fasting. Which I already pointed out, you ignored it amd that's why we keep running around in circles of your ignorance.

[quot]Also, most people's breakfasts are really just filled with sugars. [/QUO] So like I said the problem is the food, not when it's eaten.

Again, this is just based on personal beliefs and not any science, which is what you claim to follow.

Exactly. So obesity is not a symptom of insulin resistance.

Never said it is. I said obesity and insulin resistance are both caused by overconsumption.


You don't think it but you're wrong. By pure fat sources I mean things like oil, butter, lard and the like. Like I said, Meat, fish, nuts, beans and dairy products are all sources of dietary fats and they are well represented on the pyramid in roughly the ratio I suggested several times. And the top layer means added sugars. Added sugar means when you take a thing and put sugar in it. As an aside lots of people are eating just butter. They're dumb.
GENERALLY...

Carbs in America are pretty trash because you're usually not eating real bread or real pasta and of course all the added sugars. Thus, they've gotten a bad name.

I explained the whole breakfast thing pages ago. We did not eat historically on some 3 meal structure that we do today, and breakfast is the easiest thing to give up and usually the worst meal for the vast majority of people. The whole tagline of "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" is complete bullshit not backed by anything. When people say something tersely, it's gonna come off as more absolute than it really is.

What does your reply there have anything to do with eating tons of vegetable oils that we've never historically eaten? It makes sense it's probably not good to start eating something new in great quantity that we've never eaten before (that's rather different from other sources of food). You're acting like introducing a potato to a population that already normally eats vegetables is akin to starting to eat tons of vegetable oils that the species has historically never eaten (or eaten in very very very very low quantities).

Trans fats show links to many bad things like inflammation (and LDL cholesterol plus inflammation is a pretty bad combination). I didn't say what you eat doesn't affect cholesterol, I said the actual cholesterol content of the food doesn't affect your cholesterol. For example, the fact that eggs contain cholesterol doesn't matter with regards to your cholesterol, not that eggs (or anything else) doesn't have an affect on cholesterol. We already know you can hack a cholesterol test by eating a certain way beforehand if you want get a low score so you're in a lower risk bracket for your insurance.

The overarching guidelines were backwards, the stuff people actually remember and take note of... The only intake guideline the average person would probably know is the caloric intake one because it's all over the place. If you ask anyone how much X you're supposed to have everyday, they ain't gonna know. And my point is not to get people to actually know these guidelines because it's not really something people need to know to eat right. Nor would people be willing to keep count of all these things that they are eating either. Just keep it simple, avoid these problem foods as much as possible, eat real foods, and that should really be it. Of course, you'd have to go more in-depth obviously but having a person count how much sugar or fat they eat in a day just isn't something anyone is gonna do.

It's pretty damn hard to find real bread in America, I guess you don't realize how bad American food is. Refined grains are higher on the glycemic index than table sugar.

And you're evidence that you can eat sugar in the amounts that the average American does and be healthy? Sugar is causing so much sickness and chronic diseases and you're just not even gonna take a stand on that because it means you'd have to agree with me in any form?

Uhh... "keto flu" is just sugar withdrawals... it's not that the keto diet is actually doing something bad.

Funny how you can't actually say anything I said in that paragraph was wrong. You just point out I mentioned guidelines, which I meant to be general principles...

Repeating what other experts in the field have said is Dunning-Kruger? And you still don't know what Dunning-Kruger effect actually is.

Why wouldn't I know what a healthy person is? They'd have to got through a series of tests obviously, it's not like you can tell by just looking at them, though you can usually tell when someone is unhealthy.

Intermittent fasting has several documented health benefits.

What is wrong with the logic of giving up a meal that is probably the worst meal of the average person's day which also has the least important social component to it? Where's the science that says this meal is needed? I've linked to far more science and expert opinion than you have.

You said obesity leads to diabetes which it doesn't (it's usually the result of the thing that actually does lead to obesity). You can be obese and not even be close to having diabetes and you can be skinny have diabetes. If you intake too much sugar, you'll get diabetes regardless of if you're gaining weight (becoming obese) or if you're not gaining weight and staying a good weight (you're gaining fat in the wrong place regardless if your weight increases or not). If you're just eating say 4,000 calories of straight meat a day, you'll gain weight but not get diabetes.
Being obese puts you on the road to diabetes.

The food pyramid is even worse messaging than I thought if you're right about the top and pure fat sources. I recall there was some state fair (found the story I believe) where a fried stick of butter was super popular. I wouldn't even think of ordering that (though I'd try a bite) because I usually hate foods that are overly oily/buttery. Not too long ago I got a grilled chicken sandwich at my favorite chain restaurant in my area (BJ's Brewhouse) and there was so much butter/oil on it and it soaked into the bread that it ruined the entire flavor profile of the sandwich for me. I have a feeling a fried stick of butter would be like that but like 1,000 fold worse.
 
Last edited:

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,581
2,290
118
Country
Ireland
I explained the whole breakfast thing pages ago. We did not eat historically on some 3 meal structure that we do today, and breakfast is the easiest thing to give up and usually the worst meal for the vast majority of people. The whole tagline of "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" is complete bullshit not backed by anything. When people say something tersely, it's gonna come off as more absolute than it really is.
From the review you shared

"They found that men who skipped breakfast had a 27% higher risk of CHD compared with men who regularly ate breakfast"

Also I explained the issue with studies on IF already. You ignored it like you ignored my point.


And you're evidence that you can eat sugar in the amounts that the average American does and be healthy?
I never fucking said you could.


Repeating what other experts in the field have said is Dunning-Kruger? And you still don't know what Dunning-Kruger effect actually is.
You haven't cited a single fucking expert in the field.

What is wrong with the logic of giving up a meal that is probably the worst meal of the average person's day which also has the least important social component to it? Where's the science that says this meal is needed? I've linked to far more science and expert opinion than you have.
That fucking study disagrees with what you're saying right now! Are you doing this on purpose? Again:
"They found that men who skipped breakfast had a 27% higher risk of CHD compared with men who regularly ate breakfast"

You said obesity leads to diabetes which it doesn't (it's usually the result of the thing that actually does lead to obesity).
I very specifically did not say that. I stressed that fact explicitly.




That's all you're getting from me. I'm fuckin done. You keep ignoring half my posts, waiting a few posts to just say the same shit again. Backtracking on shit you said. This is fuckin dumb and pointless. You're incapable of learning because you're incapable of admitting you don't alreadyy know everything.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,921
784
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
From the review you shared

"They found that men who skipped breakfast had a 27% higher risk of CHD compared with men who regularly ate breakfast"

Also I explained the issue with studies on IF already. You ignored it like you ignored my point.


I never fucking said you could.


You haven't cited a single fucking expert in the field.

That fucking study disagrees with what you're saying right now! Are you doing this on purpose? Again:
"They found that men who skipped breakfast had a 27% higher risk of CHD compared with men who regularly ate breakfast"

I very specifically did not say that. I stressed that fact explicitly.




That's all you're getting from me. I'm fuckin done. You keep ignoring half my posts, waiting a few posts to just say the same shit again. Backtracking on shit you said. This is fuckin dumb and pointless. You're incapable of learning because you're incapable of admitting you don't alreadyy know everything.
People that eat breakfast and don't eat breakfast are 2 completely different types of people on average, it's an apples and oranges comparison. Also, the whole study is based on adjustments so it's only as good as the adjustments as the raw data showed skipping breakfast resulted in a 32% reduction in all-cause mortality. It's a bad study that really doesn't tell much at all.

I've said what you consider IF isn't anything new to how humans have normally ate over the time we've been on this planet. There's no science saying we need the 3 meal structure either.

I've cited several...

@~2:20, IF is a good way to jump start someone on the road back to metabolic health. That's literally all I said was for those that are currently unhealthy, skipping breakfast is a good idea for that along with it's probably their unhealthiest meal of the day to boot.

I've quoted you saying obesity puts you on the road to diabetes twice now...
Being obese puts you on the road to diabetes.
I don't know why you're not for telling people how to eat properly. Yes carbs by themselves are not the problem but literally the problem at the same time. The problem is the American diets has you eating loads of carbs by themselves (sans fiber) and that's where insulin resistance comes into play (the thing that puts you on the road to diabetes, not obesity). If you eat carbs with the fiber that they always have naturally come with, carbs are fine, but that is not longer how people get a majority of carbs anymore, carbs eaten on their own are horrible for you and the cause of most chronic disease nowadays.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,027
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
Also, the whole study is based on adjustments so it's only as good as the adjustments as the raw data showed skipping breakfast resulted in a 32% reduction in all-cause mortality. It's a bad study that really doesn't tell much at all.
ABSOLUTE LOL

What does this remind me of, I wonder! Could it be this, where I point out that the raw data of a study shows a positive relationship, and then after unspecified adjustments it disappears entirely... and you insist that we must assume the adjustments are all totally good, even though we literally don't know what they are, and therefore we should ignore the positive relationship in the raw data?

Why don't you take your own advice? Just for once, be consistent, and choose a tack.
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Oct 22, 2016
3,459
2,746
118
People that eat breakfast and don't eat breakfast are 2 completely different types of people on average
Is there a study that backs this up? I sometimes eat breakfast, I sometimes do not eat breakfast. I'm definitely one average person.
 

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,581
2,290
118
Country
Ireland
Is there a study that backs this up? I sometimes eat breakfast, I sometimes do not eat breakfast. I'm definitely one average person.
It also ignores the fact thay he claims breakfast is "bullshit" and we shouldn't have it. Because he makes definitive statements that are obviously stupid and then has to try and walk them back in a way that make them meaningless. So breakfast is bullshit but not for the kinds of people who eat breakfast. Good times. Smart big brain statements.
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,921
784
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
ABSOLUTE LOL

What does this remind me of, I wonder! Could it be this, where I point out that the raw data of a study shows a positive relationship, and then after unspecified adjustments it disappears entirely... and you insist that we must assume the adjustments are all totally good, even though we literally don't know what they are, and therefore we should ignore the positive relationship in the raw data?

Why don't you take your own advice? Just for once, be consistent, and choose a tack.
Yet you couldn't tell me why the adjustments of that study were bad when I asked several times. If we are saying you can't make adjustments, then like every study is invalid.

The fact that you shared this study is why everyone thinks you're a joke.
The study I shared had lots of parts to it.

Is there a study that backs this up? I sometimes eat breakfast, I sometimes do not eat breakfast. I'm definitely one average person.

It also ignores the fact thay he claims breakfast is "bullshit" and we shouldn't have it. Because he makes definitive statements that are obviously stupid and then has to try and walk them back in a way that make them meaningless. So breakfast is bullshit but not for the kinds of people who eat breakfast. Good times. Smart big brain statements.
All you guys do is make up shit I didn't say. I said the tagline that "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" is bullshit and not back by any science, not that breakfast itself is bullshit. Yet you have no science or experts to back up any of your claims. If you say I'm wrong, then you're saying Dr. Robert Lustig is wrong because all I've said is what he said because he's the expert.
 

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,581
2,290
118
Country
Ireland
Yet you couldn't tell me why the adjustments of that study were bad when I asked several times. If we are saying you can't make adjustments, then like every study is invalid.


The study I shared had lots of parts to it.




All you guys do is make up shit I didn't say. I said the tagline that "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" is bullshit and not back by any science, not that breakfast itself is bullshit. Yet you have no science or experts to back up any of your claims. If you say I'm wrong, then you're saying Dr. Robert Lustig is wrong because all I've said is what he said because he's the expert.
saying that breakfast is the most important meal is complete fucking bullshit and it's the worst meal you can have
Look at you saying it's the worst meal you can have. You're hilarious. You really are.😘Have a good one.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,027
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
Yet you couldn't tell me why the adjustments of that study were bad when I asked several times. If we are saying you can't make adjustments, then like every study is invalid.
And neither can you.

That's the whole point. You expect us to take the adjustments at 100% face value for whatever you put forward.... but not for anything else.

Why are the adjustments completely trustworthy for your study, with zero detail of what they are, but you want us to discount them wholly here?
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Oct 22, 2016
3,459
2,746
118
People that eat breakfast and don't eat breakfast are 2 completely different types of people on average, it's an apples and oranges comparison.
Look at Table 1 in the article you linked below: people who eat breakfast and people who don't are really quite similar. A few percentage difference in almost all cases. The main difference is that smokers tend to skip. The author of this article appears to work for Big Breakfast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,921
784
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
Look at you saying it's the worst meal you can have. You're hilarious. You really are.😘Have a good one.
If you're eating the typical 3 meal structure, breakfast is the worst meal for the vast vast vast majority of people. Just about everything in the breakfast aisle of the grocery store is horrible for you, not to mention the food most people get from Dunkin Donuts on their way to work.

Also Phoenixmgs sharing articles arguing against things that studies he previously shared said is just peak Phoenixmgs. 👨‍🍳💋
The study had a lot of parts to it and cited a lot of other studies about quite a few different things. You can't produce any actual science saying the 3-meal structure is superior. Eating carbs that aren't naturally occurring is really bad for you, and that's a huge percentage of people's carb intake.


And neither can you.

That's the whole point. You expect us to take the adjustments at 100% face value for whatever you put forward.... but not for anything else.

Why are the adjustments completely trustworthy for your study, with zero detail of what they are, but you want us to discount them wholly here?
I posted a whole article about from an expert over the many whys the adjustments are bad.

Nope, I don't mind discussing anything. You never said why the adjustments were wrong and the only reason you think they're wrong is because they don't agree with your preconceptions.

Look at Table 1 in the article you linked below: people who eat breakfast and people who don't are really quite similar. A few percentage difference in almost all cases. The main difference is that smokers tend to skip. The author of this article appears to work for Big Breakfast.
Huh? I don't think you read the article then. The study he is debunking says skipping breakfast is bad and he somehow works for big breakfast by saying breakfast probably hasn't much to do with the all-cause mortality difference?
 

Baffle

Elite Member
Oct 22, 2016
3,459
2,746
118
Huh? I don't think you read the article then. The study he is debunking says skipping breakfast is bad and he somehow works for big breakfast by saying breakfast probably hasn't much to do with the all-cause mortality difference?
Honestly I skimmed it because I didn't want to read it from the moment there was a mailing list pop-up, but I was really only querying your assertion that people who eat breakfast and people who don't eat breakfast are completely different kinds of people. Table 1 indicates they are similar kinds of people, apart from the smoking, but I assumed you linked me that article to show otherwise?
 

Cheetodust

Elite Member
Jun 2, 2020
1,581
2,290
118
Country
Ireland
If you're eating the typical 3 meal structure, breakfast is the worst meal for the vast vast vast majority of people. Just about everything in the breakfast aisle of the grocery store is horrible for you, not to mention the food most people get from Dunkin Donuts on their way to work.


The study had a lot of parts to it and cited a lot of other studies about quite a few different things. You can't produce any actual science saying the 3-meal structure is superior. Eating carbs that aren't naturally occurring is really bad for you, and that's a huge percentage of people's carb intake.



I posted a whole article about from an expert over the many whys the adjustments are bad.

Nope, I don't mind discussing anything. You never said why the adjustments were wrong and the only reason you think they're wrong is because they don't agree with your preconceptions.


Huh? I don't think you read the article then. The study he is debunking says skipping breakfast is bad and he somehow works for big breakfast by saying breakfast probably hasn't much to do with the all-cause mortality difference?
I mean you're free to keep replying to me if you want but if you really think I take you seriously I might start feeling bad for you.
 

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,027
5,796
118
Country
United Kingdom
I posted a whole article about from an expert over the many whys the adjustments are bad.
You provided some convenient supportive fluff, as you often do-- but nothing that actually showed why the adjustments were wrong.

All you did was point out how the raw data showed something else entirely, and that the study therefore relies entirely on those adjustments... you know, like the other study, where you accepted the adjustments unquestioningly and then moaned when I questioned what they were.

Essentially just taking the exact opposite position from the one you took before.

Nope, I don't mind discussing anything. You never said why the adjustments were wrong and the only reason you think they're wrong is because they don't agree with your preconceptions.
We don't know what the adjustments even were, because the authors didn't specify (which is itself a red flag).
 

Phoenixmgs

The Muse of Fate
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
8,921
784
118
w/ M'Kraan Crystal
Gender
Male
I mean you're free to keep replying to me if you want but if you really think I take you seriously I might start feeling bad for you.
Again, you're then not respecting all the doctors I cited, not me. I just said what they said. Looks like you're for having people continue to eat poorly and get debilitating chronic diseases.

Honestly I skimmed it because I didn't want to read it from the moment there was a mailing list pop-up, but I was really only querying your assertion that people who eat breakfast and people who don't eat breakfast are completely different kinds of people. Table 1 indicates they are similar kinds of people, apart from the smoking, but I assumed you linked me that article to show otherwise?
No ublock? Also, one group was much older than the other group.


You provided some convenient supportive fluff, as you often do-- but nothing that actually showed why the adjustments were wrong.

All you did was point out how the raw data showed something else entirely, and that the study therefore relies entirely on those adjustments... you know, like the other study, where you accepted the adjustments unquestioningly and then moaned when I questioned what they were.

Essentially just taking the exact opposite position from the one you took before.



We don't know what the adjustments even were, because the authors didn't specify (which is itself a red flag).
The whole article was explaining what was wrong with the adjustments. You have said not one single reason why the adjustments from the other study was wrong outside of you simply not liking them.

The RAW data for any study on LC is gonna show and association with covid because it was the dominant viral infection during that time frame. I don't get how you think this is some smoking gun you've discovered.

---

It's literally all about eating real food. Eating carbs minus the fiber that they naturally come with is extremely bad for you. Eating carbs with said fiber is perfectly fine. It's that simple.