|
WrenP-Complete posted:I agree; it's not the best rhetorical technique. I pinged another goon who is a relative expert in the field about it since I'm not going to try to cite sources for all of fishmech's claims. That seems like some kind of pubmed research montage that I cannot participate in tonight. That would be cool to hear. I can only cite personal experience on my end with my doctor and different dietary changes. The one thing I can say is inactivity is a big culprit. Currently I'm between 10 and 20 pounds (different studies have different goals) of being at what would be considered not overweight but it has taken a long time without daily exercise. Now the thing that sits in the back of my mind like I've dabbled in black magic and should know better is that pretty much all of my dietary needs now come from Amazon. Amazon Fresh, Whole Foods deliver, Amazon Now. I haven't been to a Trader Joe's in years and I feel like I've made a deal with the devil. 
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:I agree; it's not the best rhetorical technique. I pinged another goon who is a relative expert in the field about it since I'm not going to try to cite sources for all of fishmech's claims. That seems like some kind of pubmed research montage that I cannot participate in tonight. The thing is, fishmech posts like that all the time on whatever the subject at hand is in D&D. It's not a matter of rhetorical technique, it's a matter of making sweeping claims and inability to admit to being incorrect on the most minor of details. Case in point: fishmech posted:That would be all the food scolds complaining about nebulous concepts like "processed foods" or randomly declaring no one should be eating more than ~200 calories of sugar per day, my friend. 'Randomly Declaring' the CDC suggested limit on sugar consumption in a 2000 calorie diet. quote:Americans should limit their added sugars consumption
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:I agree; it's not the best rhetorical technique. I pinged another goon who is a relative expert in the field about it since I'm not going to try to cite sources for all of fishmech's claims. That seems like some kind of pubmed research montage that I cannot participate in tonight. i wish your goon friend the best of luck in proving that strawmanning people's posts about cheetos is actually proletariat praxis Liquid Communism posted:'Randomly Declaring' the CDC suggested limit on sugar consumption in a 2000 calorie diet. this is like the vape thread where there was general distrust of the CDC as agents of moral panic
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:20
|
|
|
luxury handset posted:this is like the vape thread where there was general distrust of the CDC as agents of moral panic Probably, but they're just quoting the Dept. of Ag and Dept. of Health and Human Services' recommendations there. It was the first result on Google.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
fishmech posted:~200 calories of sugar per day... inkblottime fucked around with this message at 02:33 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:27
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:The thing is, fishmech posts like that all the time on whatever the subject at hand is in D&D. It's not a matter of rhetorical technique, it's a matter of making sweeping claims and inability to admit to being incorrect on the most minor of details. The 2000 calorie diet is not meant for most people to follow, as it is too few calories for most Americans to eat. We use it in labeling because it's, essentially, a nice round number. Specifically, it was originally formulated around a relatively short middle aged woman's needs when it was introduced back in the early 90s. Now let's add on top of that that that says no more than 200 calories of "added sugars" which is NOT the same as "all sugars". Do you comprehend why this means stating people shouldn't eat more than 200 calories of sugar per day doesn't match up with nutritional guidelines, or no? Of course not, you just went looking for a 200 to be smug about.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
fishmech posted:The 2000 calorie diet is not meant for most people to follow, as it is too few calories for most Americans to eat. We use it in labeling because it's, essentially, a nice round number. Specifically, it was originally formulated around a relatively short middle aged woman's needs when it was introduced back in the early 90s. Now let's add on top of that that that says no more than 200 calories of "added sugars" which is NOT the same as "all sugars". Fishmech, quit arguing in bad faith for ten seconds and go read the linked guidelines. They give 2000 calories as an example in the condensed notes, to illustrate the actual recommendation of 10% of calories consumed because it makes an easily understandable round number.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:31
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:Now the thing that sits in the back of my mind like I've dabbled in black magic and should know better is that pretty much all of my dietary needs now come from Amazon. Amazon Fresh, Whole Foods deliver, Amazon Now. I haven't been to a Trader Joe's in years and I feel like I've made a deal with the devil. Whoa I want to hear more about this, and it's thread-topical as well.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Fishmech, quit arguing in bad faith for ten seconds and go read the linked guidelines. They give 2000 calories as an example in the condensed notes, to illustrate the actual recommendation of 10% of calories consumed because it makes an easily understandable round number. That says added sugars. Here I'll help you, go ahead and read this again from your own source: "Americans should keep their intake of added sugars to less than 10% of their total daily calories as part of a healthy diet. For example, in a 2,000 daily calorie diet no more than 200 calories should come from added sugars." Do you comprehend that added sugars is not all sugars? Yes or no. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:36
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:Whoa I want to hear more about this, and it's thread-topical as well. I'm not sure if it's that exciting since I live near Seattle which means I get to take advantage of many of Amazon's pilot programs. Getting groceries delivered on a schedule that can sometimes be next day or even same day just feels gratuitous. If this was back in the 80s I'm sure we'd get flagged for drug smuggling because of all the deliveries we get.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
The theory of human nutrition and diet is not that great--IMO it is probably best to have something like the more simple-minded approach that fishmech advocates. If you took the theory of human nutrition too seriously, you'd be obligated to change your diet every couple of years when each new idea comes out and contradicts the prescriptions from all of the earlier ideas.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:41
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:The theory of human nutrition and diet is not that great--IMO it is probably best to have something like the more simple-minded approach that fishmech advocates. If you took the theory of human nutrition too seriously, you'd be obligated to change your diet every couple of years when each new idea comes out and contradicts the prescriptions from all of the earlier ideas. Just to be clear, the advocation is: if you eat less, you won't get obese, no matter what kind of food you eat? Doesn't that replace one-size-fits all with another? And what does it mean to eat less? How much is less? How do we quantify this so it will make it easier for the ignorant masses to understand they don't have to be overweight if they just could follow this ambiguous argument? Why am I continuing this in a thread about retail? So how about those drone delivery devices that double as death machines? EDIT: I really did want to hear about retail, consumerism, and where it puts brick-and-mortar stores. Sometimes it's like-ooh shiny-and I get sucked up in the discussion. inkblottime fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 02:51
|
|
|
fishmech posted:That says added sugars. Here I'll help you, go ahead and read this again from your own source: Your statement was lamenting that people were told not to eat more than 200g of sugar. Sugar, by itself, is qualified as 'added sugars' by their definition as it is not in the form of naturally occurring sugars in whole foods.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:07
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:The theory of human nutrition and diet is not that great--IMO it is probably best to have something like the more simple-minded approach that fishmech advocates. If you took the theory of human nutrition too seriously, you'd be obligated to change your diet every couple of years when each new idea comes out and contradicts the prescriptions from all of the earlier ideas. everyone's advocating the same simple minded approach of don't eat too much, fishmech is just going off that potato chips are on parity with organic fruit when it comes to healthfulness because he's looking for something to argue against tonight
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Your statement was lamenting that people were told not to eat more than 200g of sugar. Sugar, by itself, is qualified as 'added sugars' by their definition as it is not in the form of naturally occurring sugars in whole foods. 200 calories is about 50g of sugars which is also calculated in carbs. There's a lot of math here and I only understand about half of how it factors into the others. Switching units was not fair of fishmech and it threw me off for a minute too. So... who's shopping online for Black Friday?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:08
|
|
|
Diabetes is caused by vast consumption of insulin via animals who have livers. Insulin resistance Go vegan or die of a heart attack or stroke. Or take about 50 pills for hypoglycemia.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:10
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Your statement was lamenting that people were told not to eat more than 200g of sugar. Sugar, by itself, is qualified as 'added sugars' by their definition as it is not in the form of naturally occurring sugars in whole foods. Nope! Added sugar is not all sugars! This is very basic nutrition that you're oblivious to, for some reason. And I'm honestly not sure how you don't get that? If you drink a shitload of orange juice (which is very high in natural sugar) you will get just as fat as from drinking the same amount of soda - and incidentally you'll piss away all the excess vitamins too. Comprende? inkblottime posted:200 calories is about 50g of sugars which is also calculated in carbs. There's a lot of math here and I only understand about half of how it factors into the others. Switching units was not fair of fishmech and it threw me off for a minute too. If you don't understand how the calories in basic macronutrients can be directly converted to the mass of the macronutrients involved... maybe don't try to debate nutrition? Also again, they're not saying no more than x for all sugars there, it's only "added sugars" which is a subset of all sugars.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:15
|
|
|
^^^ Discussions of nutrition is not a zero-sum game and it really doesn't belong here. Several people have indicated they want to move on. What the hell is wrong with you? ^^^ Okay okay, I've got a good one. If everyone stops shopping at brick and mortar stores on Black Friday and switches to all online, is this one part that the Big Box Stores played in their own death? Like after whipping up the madness and having people skip Thanksgiving to work and such and turning it into a negative stereotype of the holiday? inkblottime fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:17
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Your statement was lamenting that people were told not to eat more than 200g of sugar. Sugar, by itself, is qualified as 'added sugars' by their definition as it is not in the form of naturally occurring sugars in whole foods. The nutrition information label for an apple lists its sugar content, none of which is added I would think.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
Nutrition Chat is still MUCH better than Vape Chat so please carry on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:21
|
|
|
inkblottime posted:Okay okay, I've got a good one. If everyone stops shopping at brick and mortar stores on Black Friday and switches to all online, is this one part that the Big Box Stores played in their own death? Like after whipping up the madness and having people skip Thanksgiving to work and such and turning it into a negative stereotype of the holiday? I worked in retail for some time and I will say straight up that it made me absolutely despise Thanksgiving and ever since I got out I don't even leave my home on Black Friday for any reason and I don't even think about buying stuff online. It definitely got turned into a negative weekend for me in that respect, but it's also a good thing because I just do other stuff and relax. So it's not like a solid four days of wanting to walk into traffic like when I was still a store manager. Like, day after Christmas sales/Christmas Eve were bad but not even close to giving me the amount of hate for a time of year that Black Friday did.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
Black Friday is definitely nothing like it was even a few years ago. My store opens early for it and has a huge sale (9 AM what madness), but it is merely a really good day and not a crushing human wave like it used to be. Online shopping deals are so easy mainly. Sitting in line for hours to get whatever doorbuster deal the big box store loses its magic once people realize it only matters for the first handful. I have never been super excited about buying things I wouldn't normally so most deals are easy to ignore. The only black Friday deal I ever bought was the PS4 with Spider-Man bundle. I wanted to play Red Dead 2, and figured hey free Spider-Man. I ordered it online, and even picked it up, almost a week before Black Friday even happened too. Thanks Target.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:35
|
|
|
^^^ Target has been doing some things right recently. I think they got an inside look at the machine that is Amazon back when they were partnered. Splitting with Amazon was probably the best decision they made and yet it sounded crazy at the time. ^^^ Neo Rasa posted:...like when I was still a store manager. You've done your time, my friend, and now you are free. I was an assistant manager at a discount bookstore back in the day. Never again will I go into management, much less retail management. inkblottime fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
fishmech posted:That's not anything that Americans eat in large amounts, largely because such things as dosing your food with lead to make it sweeter has been banned for decades on end. for someone so good at writing lots of words you really are bad at reading them, you know that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:44
|
|
|
hell yeah black friday gonna pick me up an IPS monitor wooooooooooooooooooooooooo
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 03:56
|
|
|
Nutritional items are sold at retail.  Where will you get your avocadoes for your french toast after the Collapse, hmmm? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 05:48
|
|
|
Mister Facetious posted:Nutritional items are sold at retail. I'll probably buy them from a Canadian.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 05:56
|
|
|
Just went to a frys. Asked why the shelves were empty as fuckk Was calmly told the company was working to complete vendor transaction backlog and restore supply chain needs. Pretty much love this robotic canned response corprate ordered them to repeat over and over 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 06:16
|
|
|
Hey WrenP pinged me to try to sort out this mess but I’m studying for a test so consider this advance warning im gona effort at u if this keeps up I am going to rely on her vouching for me but I am a legit Minor National Authority on this general area Like I appeared on C-SPAN 2 once and have been on panels with FDA people and I have eaten food Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 06:23
|
|
|
Could I suggest we make a Nutrition Helldome thread to banish further discussions of nutrition to? Not regular food talk, just nutrition stuff. Regular food talk is kind of bonding, whereas nutrition makes people take out the knives.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 06:27
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:...whereas nutrition makes people take out the knives. Browsing keto friendly food on Amazon, there was open hostility between reviewers about what defines keto friendly for certain ingredients. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 06:47
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Hey WrenP pinged me to try to sort out this mess but I’m studying for a test so consider this advance warning im gona effort at u if this keeps up If I eat 2000 calories of lard and powdered sugar per day, is that the same as kale and chicken breast
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 11:47
|
|
|
Lard makes for a great spread on bread. Love it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 12:50
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:Could I suggest we make a Nutrition Helldome thread to banish further discussions of nutrition to? Not regular food talk, just nutrition stuff. Regular food talk is kind of bonding, whereas nutrition makes people take out the knives. I'd definitely agree with this. From another thread: Ghost Leviathan posted:Ah, goons, once again you never, ever turn down a food derail, triply so if it's about fast food. E: I read this as advice. WrenP-Complete fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Oct 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 15:48
|
|
|
Fishmech will just move on to his usual thing of pretending there's no such thing as unhealthy posting habits
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Hey WrenP pinged me to try to sort out this mess but I’m studying for a test so consider this advance warning im gona effort at u if this keeps up Where have I heard a promise of an effort post from you before?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 16:04
|
|
|
Dameius posted:Where have I heard a promise of an effort post from you before? I wouldn't waste my effort posts on you lot either. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
Sundae posted:I wouldn't waste my effort posts on you lot either. Well sure, effort posting at goons is like trying to dig your way out of wells for all the good it does.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 16:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 19:34 |
|
|
More like dig your way out of a room full of health food containers like Big Mac boxes and Mountain Dew cans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2019 16:36
|
|
