Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 On Tuesday, October 7, 2003, at 05:39 AM, wrote: > Message: 3 > Mon, 6 Oct 2003 09:41:58 -0700 > " daveo " <daveo > RE: How It Was > > >>> Well, the trouble is, the average person cannot conduct double-blind > clinical studies or do laboratory experiments to measure such things as > the > carbohydrate content of certain foods, etc.<< > > You're correct, but many other people around the world do exactly those > kinds of studies, and hundreds of billions of dollars are spent each year > on > doing just what you lament is not being done, even by a large number of > small-fry researchers. Name any outside the glycemic index studies. I believe you are greatly mistaken. > > Are all of them high quality studies? Of course not and only a fool would > claim otherwise. However, the quality of many is very high, and once you' > ve > become accustomed to reading them, you'll probably discover that the bias > is > also very low. Name some. Cite some. > > > >>> So unless the research is solid, and to be trusted, everything that >>> flows > from it is biased, almost always toward what ever product they want to > sell.<< > > Mostly, I rely on peer reviews usually done along with the research. > IMHO, > it's rare that one's peers allow certain things (i.e., personal biases and > totally sloppy research) to make it into the public discourse. Oh, brother. Again, we totally disagree. It is exactly peer review that perpetuates bias. It devolved into a good old boy network. Ask any anthropologist or archaeologist or geologist how it works. > > Beyond this, there is also a growing level of politics in science. Who > would have thunk it! So, we see that even science is not immune to the > debate raging between the left and the right. Regardless of all this, > most > science withstands the attempts to bend it to one's political aims. Scientists are people. It's that simple. People are biased. Ergo, Scientists are Biased. And saying that most science resists politics is to ignore history, which is replete with examples of exactly such bending, from Galileo and Copernicus to Hitler and Stalin forcing their scientists to entertain fallacious notions and occult beliefs, to the eugenics experiments in the USA in the 1930 - 1980s, to Mendelean genetics, et cetera. Science has never been FREE from political pressure, or religious bigotry for that matter. > > > >>> Look how the Atkins supporters skew and cloud things.<< > > I'll be the first to admit that Atkins is not for everybody. However, > when > one reads Medline in sufficient detail, the claims of Dr Atkins are > substantiated repeatedly from many other sources. Get use to it b/c the > science of Atkins is not going away. LOL - what ever. There are still flat-earthers, too, you know. > > > >>> Who's to know what to believe, no matter how much we read?<< > > It's a long frustrating process. Knowing who to believe is seldom easy. > The hype abounds to convince us that this is the " honest to God " truth > " for > sure. " What is truth? to quote the co-pilot. > > I suggest that we all have beliefs which limit us in a number of > unseen/unknown ways. Gee, a revelation. Publish or perish. lol > Just getting beyond those limits can dramatically > improve our acceptance of certain ideas. Praise Jay-Zeus! > No one should be without a healthy > sense of skepticism, but it ought to be applied only when all the > necessary > facts are clearly positioned on the table. Who decides which are necessary or when it's enough? Sounds selective and exclusionary to me. > > > >>> I've been fat a long time and have read countless things about it, and >>> I'm > as confused as ever.<< > > Gene, I remember many of your emails on the topic, and I know what it > feels > like from when I weighed in at 211 lbs. At 5'-9 " , I've resolved my weight > to a wonderful 172. I mentioned the total process as I went thru it and > got > a lot of flack for it. If you're interested, I'm happy to share it again. eat less, move more I know the formula. It's putting it into practice after decades of sedentary lifestyle that hangs me up. > > > >>> I tend to trust the glycemic index analysis...<< > > It's a good reference point for judging one's diet, especially if affected > by any one of a number of diet related complications. Yes, and it's not a diet. It's not a system. It's just a table of how fast and high a given food spikes your blood sugar. Avoiding the high spikes helps everyone's body function smoother. It's that simple. > > > > > On Monday, October 6, 2003, at 05:02 AM, > wrote: > >> Message: 13 >> Sun, 5 Oct 2003 15:56:12 -0700 >> " daveo " <daveo >> RE: Bias in the Media >> >> If one's reality comes mostly from reading snake oil diet books, then >> I can see how this kind of bias from such charlatans would adversely >> affect them. >> >> For me, the best way to overcome bias is to simply read more. The >> truth about any topic usually withstands all of the spin/lies these >> charlatans can throw at it. > > " Just following orders is the standard state of mankind. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 I don't see any serious discussion rising from your comments. Been there. Done that. Didn't like it then either. Have a great day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 Exactly. It's the usual pattern. Fail to address the subject. Instead, it's the usual condescending remarks and lack of substance. S. , " daveo " <daveo@m...> wrote: > > I don't see any serious discussion rising from your comments. Been there. > Done that. Didn't like it then either. Have a great day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 Ditto. It's sad to see so much potential in such a state. But, hey, we've all got to live in our own bodies and minds, no matter what! So, Shawn, how's the veggie life been treating you? daveo matrixenos [matrixenos] Tuesday, October 07, 2003 12:36 PM Re: God's Bias Exactly. It's the usual pattern. Fail to address the subject. Instead, it's the usual condescending remarks and lack of substance. S. , " daveo " <daveo@m...> wrote: > > I don't see any serious discussion rising from your comments. Been >there. Done that. Didn't like it then either. Have a great day! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2003 Report Share Posted October 7, 2003 tsk tsk.... To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves. ~ Will Durant , " daveo " <daveo@m...> wrote: > > Ditto. It's sad to see so much potential in such a state. But, hey, we've > all got to live in our own bodies and minds, no matter what! > > So, Shawn, how's the veggie life been treating you? > > daveo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.