|
icantfindaname posted:Tell me more about the wave of child obesity in Nigeria and Bangladesh due to coke and big macs http://bit.ly/1kJ000f (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 06:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
Is it possible to be a bigger low effort shitlord than this? How about addressing the points that people have made against you instead of Gish Galloping away?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
Well, he's got us there I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:02
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Tell me more about the wave of child obesity in Nigeria and Bangladesh due to coke and big macs Actually there is wave of obesity in the world due to a shift from staples to high sugar and high fat food.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:03
|
|
|
Grognan posted:Is it possible to be a bigger low effort shitlord than this? How about addressing the points that people have made against you instead of Gish Galloping away? The guy asked me about obesity in the developing world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Tell me more about the wave of child obesity in Nigeria and Bangladesh due to coke and big macs This is considerably more specific than that. Answer the question people have of you if want people to listen to you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
The whole thing is a derail to begin with, the real problem here is that he keeps refusing to give a reason why industrial scale grain production has to stop, or how this could be done without starving millions (billions?) of people. He's conflating two different problems, the problem of improving people's diets and the problem of maintaining agricultural output with global warming. The solutions to these problems are not the same, and his proposed solution to both seems at first glance to be flat out impossible. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 07:22 on Apr 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
Grognan posted:This is considerably more specific than that. Answer the question people have of you if want people to listen to you. Why specifically Nigeria and Bangladesh? Why do you care so much about those two places? Do you think googling "obesity and the developing world" seeing the thousands of links come up describing the alarming rise of obesity is not enough to answer a snarky question about big macs and soda?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:The whole thing is a derail to begin with, the real problem here is that he keeps refusing to give a reason why industrial scale grain production has to stop, or how this could be done without starving millions (billions?) of people. Maybe you missed this post quote:
By the way, it seems to me that industrial grain production will have a hell of a time adapting to climate change
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:21
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Maybe you missed this post Just out of curiosity, which is more tolerant of drought/overwatering/high temperatures/low temperatures, grain or fruit and vegetables?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Just out of curiosity, which is more tolerant of drought/overwatering/high temperatures/low temperatures, grain or fruit and vegetables? I have no clue, I have to read research done about this problem before I can answer with any degree of certainty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:I have no clue, I have to read research done about this problem before I can answer with any degree of certainty. So in other words you admit that you have no idea if climate change will disproportionately affect grains in comparison to fruits and vegetables but feel that it's important that we switch anyway because climate change is going to make growing grain harder? Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Do you think googling "obesity and the developing world" seeing the thousands of links come up describing the alarming rise of obesity is not enough to answer a snarky question about big macs and soda? Yes, because you're being a straw man rather than someone who actually talks about the issues. http://bit.ly/1kpL4bw There, I have addressed you with a source that you cannot refute. edit: The fourth result actually finds you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
Grognan posted:Yes, because you're being a straw man rather than someone who actually talks about the issues. This is dumb. I answered a snarky question with a snarky answer. Why are you butt-hurt
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 07:54
|
|
|
Kalman posted:So in other words you admit that you have no idea if climate change will disproportionately affect grains in comparison to fruits and vegetables but feel that it's important that we switch anyway because climate change is going to make growing grain harder? I was referring to a comparison between the two types of crops. There's lots of studies out there trying to quantify the impact CC will have on food production. Very recent evidence suggests that at least for wheat, it's nutritional quality is suffering due to increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Which is worrisome. quote:For the first time, a field test has demonstrated that elevated levels of carbon dioxide inhibit plants’ assimilation of nitrate into proteins, indicating that the nutritional quality of food crops is at risk as climate change intensifies. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/food-qu...d%3A+tech_talk+(CBS+News+-+Tech+Talk)
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:He's conflating two different problems, the problem of improving people's diets and the problem of maintaining agricultural output with global warming. Don't forget the problems of transgenics and Monsanto making money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 08:13
|
|
|
If you've got 5 dollars to get your daily 2500 calories, are you going to spend it all on things that hit the caloric target or are you going to spend it on half your calories worth of fruits and vegetables? This is a situation many people are in. What you're proposing doesn't affect the reason why people go to grains and meat. If anything, we'll probably genetically engineer crops to minimise effects from global warming and land degradation before we go to 'alternative farming' whatever that even means.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 08:18
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:
No, I trust Olivier De Schutter, Special Rapporteur on the right to food to the UN who says the solutions to these problems are actually achievable. quote:“Conventional farming relies on expensive inputs, fuels climate change and is not resilient to Is this guy a looney? Is he crazy for thinking this stuff?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 08:22
|
|
|
Kalman posted:So in other words you admit that you have no idea if climate change will disproportionately affect grains in comparison to fruits and vegetables but feel that it's important that we switch anyway because climate change is going to make growing grain harder? More on this. According to the UN, climate change is already adversely affecting two important crops. quote:“Climate change has negatively affected wheat and maize yields for many regions and in the global aggregate,” according to a 48-page summary of the report http://www.ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 08:34
|
|
|
What makes you think fruits and vegetables fare better due to climate change. Or are you going to be an eternal agnostic and hide behind "I don't know." about that too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 09:45
|
|
|
logger posted:What makes you think fruits and vegetables fare better due to climate change. Or are you going to be an eternal agnostic and hide behind "I don't know." about that too. Is it bad to admit when you don't know something? To answer your question, it seems like both fruits and grain will be impacted by CC. However, it's healthy to have a diet rich in vegetables and fruits, and I think healthy diets are a good thing. white sauce fucked around with this message at 09:59 on Apr 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 09:53
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Is it bad to admit when you don't know something, or would you prefer I lie and make something up? It's bad to hold a position that relies on knowing something, and after admitting not knowing that something to continue to argue for that position. I think the preferred choice here is for you to go away and learn the something to see if it influences your position.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 10:01
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Is it bad to admit when you don't know something? To answer your question, it seems like both fruits and grain will be impacted by CC. However, it's healthy to have a diet rich in vegetables and fruits, and I think healthy diets are a good thing. Of course fruits and vegetables are good for you, but you were asked if climate change would disproportionally affect grains compared to fruits and vegetables and your response singled out only the impact of climate change on grain. Since you neglected to post anything about the impact of climate change on fruits and vegetables it seemed to me you were trying to lie by omission.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 10:06
|
|
|
logger posted:Of course fruits and vegetables are good for you, but you were asked if climate change would disproportionally affect grains compared to fruits and vegetables and your response singled out only the impact of climate change on grain. I;m sorry if it seemed I was trying to lie. I'm trying to understand why people in this thread keep asking me the same questions about fruits and vegetables, when there are other problems we face that have not been discussed. CC will affect all aspects of agriculture. We have to change the way we grow food if we are to properly feed a rising population. Right now, billions are obese, billions are starving, and there is very little being done to address these issues. I think I'm going to stop posting in this thread for a while, since people seem to have an issue with me bringing up these subjects here. Cheers guys 
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 10:28
|
|
|
bob holness paradox posted:It's bad to hold a position that relies on knowing something, and after admitting not knowing that something to continue to argue for that position. I think the preferred choice here is for you to go away and learn the something to see if it influences your position. I did learn something and admit that one of my previous beliefs was misguided. Oh well
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 10:29
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:I'm having trouble coming up with an acceptable answer as to why fruits and veggies would be easier to produce on a wide scale compared to grains, and I have to feeling that there is no reason why they would be easier to cultivate than grains. However, the way we process and refine grains often leads to a nutritionally deficient product. Well, take something like brown rice. It has health advantages compared to white rice because it has more vitamins and a little more fibre, but white rice is commonly enriched to add back the vitamins. Combine white rice with beans and you will probably have all the fibre you need. So why do people use white rice instead of brown? Well, it has a significantly longer shelf life than brown rice and it is frequently considered to be more appetizing. The processing was done for a reason, and the slight loss in nutritional value can be easily compensated for, so the trade off seems totally reasonable. It's important to try and work to make sure people have the resources and knowledge to eat a healthy and balanced diet. You don't really get there by demonizing individual products that fill an important niche in nutrition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
Tight Booty Shorts posted:Is it bad to admit when you don't know something? To answer your question, it seems like both fruits and grain will be impacted by CC. However, it's healthy to have a diet rich in vegetables and fruits, and I think healthy diets are a good thing. Rich people can have healthy diets. For poor people, having a diet at all is what's important to them, and grain-heavy diets will always be more practical for that purpose. For the first time in history, we've nearly eliminated famine as a consideration, and it is due to industrial farming and genetic engineering of grains that we have almost achieved this. You seem to think that the suffering of a rich American with a beer belly is more important, or a more pressing concern, than the suffering of a starving African. The people at Monsanto disagree.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
AuMaestro posted:Rich people can have healthy diets. For poor people, having a diet at all is what's important to them, and grain-heavy diets will always be more practical for that purpose. For the first time in history, we've nearly eliminated famine as a consideration, and it is due to industrial farming and genetic engineering of grains that we have almost achieved this. Do you have a source for this (both that famine is nearly eliminated as a concern and that this is due to GE and industrial farming)? South Sudan is on the verge of a famine. Historically, many famines have happened during times when supply of grains was high. While supply is an important factor in food security, in many cases it matters more how people access this supply and how it is distributed. We could have twice the amount of food necessary to feed everyone in the world and it wouldn't matter if large groups of people were too poor to afford it. In South Sudan the potential famine is driven by social conflict. Genetic engineering can't prevent civil wars. quote:You seem to think that the suffering of a rich American with a beer belly is more important, or a more pressing concern, than the suffering of a starving African. The people at Monsanto disagree. I don't think that Monsanto is driven by the suffering of starving Africans. Surely it's possible to embrace genetic engineering without embracing the companies that profit from it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
FuriousxGeorge posted:Well, take something like brown rice. It has health advantages compared to white rice because it has more vitamins and a little more fibre, but white rice is commonly enriched to add back the vitamins. Combine white rice with beans and you will probably have all the fibre you need. So why do people use white rice instead of brown? Well, it has a significantly longer shelf life than brown rice and it is frequently considered to be more appetizing. The processing was done for a reason, and the slight loss in nutritional value can be easily compensated for, so the trade off seems totally reasonable. It's important to try and work to make sure people have the resources and knowledge to eat a healthy and balanced diet. You don't really get there by demonizing individual products that fill an important niche in nutrition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
teejayh posted:It isn't a matter of just adding back the missing vitamins and minerals. White rice is made entirely of the endosperm of the grain, brown rice still contains the bran and the germ layers. Those two layers still being included helps control the breakdown of the starchy endosperm. With the rise in diabetes among first world populations, nutrition is more than just replacing missing vitamins, and calorie density. The average american diet consists of massive amounts of refined carbohydrates per meal, and it has been that way since the Nixon administration essentially created the industry for Agribusiness. We had so much corn, and other grains, we had to figure out how to turn them into cheap food. Yes, which is why I mentioned combining things like beans into the meal to compensate and creating a balanced overall diet plan instead of urging people to eat only a diet of white rice.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Okay, millions of people would be dying of vitamin deficiency if not for golden rice and other biotech products. Is that better? While looking that up, I ran into this page by Greenpeace: quote:GE 'Golden' rice has been in development for over 20 years. The tens of millions of dollars invested in GE 'Golden' rice would have been better spent on VAD solutions that are already available and working, such as food supplements, food fortification and home gardening. Greenpeace believes that, by combating VAD with ecologically farmed home and community gardens, sustainable systems are created that provide food security and diversity in a way that is empowering people, protects biodiversity, and ensures a long-lasting solution to VAD and malnutrition. What a pile of disingenuous tripe. They encourage opposition to not-for-profit research into Golden Rice and then trash it for not having been tested well enough.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
At least they aren't setting fields used in controlled experiments on fire and then asking where the research is! Oh wait...well, at least this specific group has never done that! As far as we know!
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Just to comment that Golden Rice has still not been used to help fight vitamin A deficiency. I believe a post about this was referred to a few pages back in this same thread. Let's not forget that their solution to people who are already living at a subsistence level and suffering vitamin A deficiency is that they should spend more of their time working on a home garden to grow their own crops to help save them from vitamin deficiency. Just guessing here, but possibly they're suffering vitamin deficiency because they can't afford the time and money (and space) required to have that home garden full of vitamin A containing plants?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Kalman posted:Let's not forget that their solution to people who are already living at a subsistence level and suffering vitamin A deficiency is that they should spend more of their time working on a home garden to grow their own crops to help save them from vitamin deficiency. Their solution is "people who don't have enough to eat are fat and should eat less grains" because they can't compartmentalize issues beyond The Bad Food Thing. meat sweats fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Apr 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
Hey what's up guys  
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
karthun posted:Actually there is wave of obesity in the world due to a shift from staples to high sugar and high fat food. This is true and vastly more palatable than a LMGTFY link. It reminds me of the situation with Tonga facing flak over banning the import of chicken rumps to try and curtail the obesity epidemic that has happened there. While this is way more specific than the points that Tight Booty Shorts was trying to make, you can at least base some discussion on it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
pd187 posted:Hey what's up guys My dad has been getting on the fluoride is evil bandwagon. At first he even started buying only bottled water. I had to explain to him Belgium doesn't add fluoride to its water supply.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 04:06
|
|
|
NeilPerry posted:My dad has been getting on the fluoride is evil bandwagon. At first he even started buying only bottled water. I had to explain to him Belgium doesn't add fluoride to its water supply. Precious bodily fluids. Tight Booty Shorts posted:Is it bad to admit when you don't know something? To answer your question, it seems like both fruits and grain will be impacted by CC. However, it's healthy to have a diet rich in vegetables and fruits, and I think healthy diets are a good thing. Yes, it's healthy. However, "Eats sufficient calories, could use some more fibre and trace nutrients" is a substantial improvement over "loving starving". Also, bread which includes sourdough and whole grains or seeds is healthier and tastier and generally superior to toast in every way  Also, have some required viewing for this thread. tl;dr: barring half a dozen failed states and war torn hellholes, family planning is working. The world reproductive rate is approaching replacement rate. As children grow up and old people die off, the older age groups will get filled up and world population overall can be expected to stabilise around 10-11 billion people (the filling up happens because the world population pyramid is still a bit bottom heavy).
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2014 10:18
|
|
|
I'm not sure this particular harmful scientific monster has appeared in this thread, so I present to you, the ADD-causing, cancer-inducing, kid-hating phenomenon:  wifi in schools!  Metroland posted:Readin’, Ritin’, Radiation Anyone with any familiarity with the issue want to comment? On the surface it seems ludicrous to connect non-ionizing radiation to cancer, and it seems that even the research they are bringing up mostly has to do with pregnancy, not childhood, but I'm just a physicist in training.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 12:46 |
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I'm not sure this particular harmful scientific monster has appeared in this thread, so I present to you, the ADD-causing, cancer-inducing, kid-hating phenomenon: These people are idiots and probably don't realize they have likely spent their entire lives within a few miles of at least one transmitter that is millions of times more powerful than any wifi.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2014 21:53
|
|