Finally! Someone besides myself who posts something related to sensory substitution/augmentation! ^^
The compass belt would be a cool add-on to a lot of games. Make one that works like the linked one (with real world input) but add a Bluetooth interface so you can also get information from games and such. From what I've read about the (crazy) level of integration with these types of devices, I'd bet something like that would add a very decent upgrade to the sense of immersion (if not exactly useful information) to many games.
What about Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation? I tried this with a 9V battery and a couple of makeshift electrodes fashioned from aluminum foil and duct tape. Ok, so I had no control of the current being passed through my head (which I believe should be <1,5mA) but when I popped on the electrodes, stood up with my eyes closed and flipped the switch.. Hell, I almost fell into my TV, and my friend who tried it actually did end up on the floor. It really does tip your balance in the direction of the anode, and I can imagine using this with f.ex. driving or flying simulator type games would be quite the experience.
Perhaps a headband or hat of some sort with proximity sensors and small button vibrators? Something like the Haptic Radar project only discreet enough that us nerds and geeks at least would consider wearing it now and then even when not gaming (because sensomotoric correlations are the key to integration). Like with the compass belt idea, add Bluetooth and the ability for games to override the real-world information. Perhaps an added sense of distance (just like the headband works in the real world) to walls and objects in an FPS game?
You do realize that Atkins has been roundly criticized in the literature by every nutritional authority, right? The National Academy of Sciences, the AMA, the ADA, the ACS, the AHA, the Cleveland Clinic, Johns Hopkins, the American Kidney Fund, the American College of Sports Medicine, and the National Institutes of Health has all criticized the Atkins plan. See the AtkinsExposed website [atkinsexposed.org] I linked above.
I have read the link and it didn't exactly convince me. Every person quoted in that article uses a horrid Strawman-argument. Taubes repeatedly says in interviews, debates and lectures that overeating obviously causes "excess accumulation of fatty tissue". The entire article seems to be based around the idiotic Strawman that that you can eat 10.000 calories of fat a day and loose weight which obviously isn't the case.
You can find a handful of people with "Dr." before their name who will tell you than smoking cigarettes is fine and dandy, or with "PhD" afterward who will tell you that climate change is a hoax -- or that 9/11 was a controlled demolition, or that we never went to the moon, or whatever. This does not change the science.
Agreed. This goes both ways though, especially when there is funding involved. In fact, most doctors risk huge lawsuits and revoked medical licenses if they recommend anything but the established high-carb diet and something does indeed go wrong (at least here in Scandinavia), no matter how stupid or unrelated it might be. This put together with the fact that ADA/AHA/ACA/etc. (just like the Norwegian government) can't suddenly start funding research trying to prove that said governmental instances has indeed been killing people for 40 years paints a pretty clear picture of why so many medical professionals are stuck in their dogma. Also, God complex. Again, due to my diabetes I know all to well that medical doctors and nutritionists quite nearly have a seizure if you so much as ask "why?" or "what if?" because there is no bloody way their 30-50 years old "facts" might be wrong.
No, in fact insulin has an anti-inflammatory effect [liebertonline.com] (see also here [buffalo.edu].)
Yes, sure. This is why Dr. Atkins, Dr. Hexeberg and Drs. Eades to name a few have treated thousands of deadly ill heart disease (inflammation of blood vessels) patients with a low carb diet and seen time and time again full recovery. This is why reducing carbohydrate intake lets fibromyalgia (basically inflammation of muscle tissue) sufferers get back to living life.
I'm sick of that argument, because fat never went out! This is the biggest lie in Taubes' collection of whoppers. There was a tiny drop, about 8%, in the use of added fats and oils between 1993 and 1997 at the height of the "low fat" push -- followed by a 17% increase between 1997 and 2000 [usda.gov]. Fat intake increased between 1971 and 1991 [cdc.gov].
I repeat: when you're overeating by 500 calories a day, shuffling around the proportions of macronutrients is re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. (What did dip slightly was percent of calories as fat -- because our overeating of refined grain products grew slightly faster than our overeating of added fats and oils. Overeating being the key here.)
It all started in the 1950'es with Ancel Keys and his "7 countries study" that showed a clear correlation between heart disease mortality and fat intake, which was in fact a "22 countries study" that showed absolutely no such correlation at all. In fact, in the original data, countries like Greece and Norway consumed a huge amount of fat and had little to no heart disease at all but because of his need to be right and receive further funding, he did what any respected scientist would do and cherry-picked the data he needed.
You don't strike me as an idiot. Compare what your parents or grandparents ate to what you find on display in most supermarkets these days. My gra
Holy crap, I meant "a pound of steak"! I was proof reading my post and clicked "Submit" instead of "Continue Editing". Sorry, I do not "eat stake". -__-'
*sigh* So what about Dr. Robert Atkins? Dr. Michael R. Eades and his wife Dr. Mary Dan Eades? Dr. Sofie Hexeberg? Professor Wolfgang Lutz? Dr. Fedon Lindberg? Dr. Torkil P. Andersen? I could go on, and on, and on, but you get the point.
No, in fact the bulk of your caloric intake should be complex carbohydrates. Now, highly refined carbs do make it easier to overeat -- as do fatty foods. But the bulk of our problem is very simple: we eat something on the order of 25% more calories now than we did three or four decades ago. When you're overeating by 500 calories a day, shuffling around the proportions of macronutrients is re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Yes, it's almost impossible to gain weight without consuming too many calories total, but have you read or heard any of the science Mr. Taubes often quotes? There are many places around the world where children die from malnutrition while their mothers are overweight. Now, most mothers would easily starve themselves to feed their children. How do you explain the coexistence of malnutrition and obesity within a community?
Yeah, that's why you see so many fat Japanese people, all that rice. And why we've had all these "western diseases" for centuries, as we ate a grain-centered diet since, like, the beginning of human civilization.
Oh, wait a minute...obesity rates in Japan, where the typical diet gets about 55 [diet-i.com] to 60% [kikkoman.com] of calories from carbs, are about 1/10 those of the U.S. [nationmaster.com] -- but are rising as carb levels decrease and fat and protein levels increase.
And the fact that for most of human history[*] the majority of the human race has eaten a grain-centered high carbohydrate diet -- these "diseases of affluence" were awfully rare until the 20th century.
([*]To be taken literally: history starts with writing, which comes after the Neolithic revolution.)
Japanese people also work far harder than most us Westeners, in addition to eating a lot of fish, shellfish, eggs and meat. Their overall sugar consumption is also faaar lower than most so-called "Americanized" societies. Obviously you should get a fair bit of complex carbs and it's not impossible to live well with quite a bit of them (all else being fairly optimal).
As I said, inflammation is one of the primary causes of pretty much every "life-style" disease out there, which is a fact. Insulin is pro-inflammatory, as is an Omega-3/Omega-6 balance too far in favor of Omega-6. You know how to get a lot of Omega-3? Fish, shellfish, eggs, (grass fed) red meats, etc. You know who eats a lot of these things? The Japanese.
Also, what we have done in recorded history has nothing to do with our biology or evolution. The fact is, we've been growing crops for the past ~10.000 years which in evolutionary terms is just barely a blip on the radar. Hunter/gatherers collected fruits and berries when they could and fattened up for winter, but otherwise ate what the hunters brought home. After all, wild carbohydrates aren't exactly "in stock" all year around while meat and fish is.
You know who has the lowest incidents of heart disease, stroke, diabetes and so on? The Eskimo, Inuit, Masai, and other "primitive" populations who have next-to no carbohydrates and a ton of meat and fats in their diets. These people aren't special, they are part of the exact same gene pool as us.
I'm sick of this debate, because all that should be necessary is to look at rates of obesity and diabetes before and after we suddenly got all the fatphobic propaganda. Hint: diabetes was almost a non-issue and obesity levels had been stable for decades. Out goes the fat (obviously replaced by carbs, because they had to be replaced by something), and BAM, obesity/diabetes epidemic.
And a high protein meal will also raise insulin levels [medbio.info] -- good, since insulin is necessary for uptake of amino acids protein synthesis.. blablabla..
I don't even know why I bother responding, but if you live on a what is, in essence a starvation diet and do hard physical labor pretty much every waking hour of the day, well of course you're going to be skinny.
Bacon, butter, sour cream, cheese... Why not go all the way, just leave out the potatoes, and pour pure fat into your throat?;)
I guess you're either trolling, or ignorant. Feel free to check out the blog of M.D. Michael R. Eades at http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ as well as his books, and "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes (and a heap of other great books, none of which I can recall at the moment).
Natural fats aren't bad for your health. No, not even saturated fat. Do yourself and those close to you the most important favor you'll ever do and read some science on nutrition instead of gobbeling up the official nutritional guidelines with an unhealthy side-dish of insulin-raising, unnecessary carbohydrates.
As Gary Taubes, author of "Good Calories, Bad Calories" says, workout out makes you hungry. Everyone has heard about "Working up an appetite" but for some strange reason forgets it when they talk about exercise. If you just eat based on hunger, working out will do nothing to lower your weight. It will of course help cardiovascular health, and weight lifting helps keep your metabolism and good hormones up, your stress hormones down, helps your mental health and staves off the debilitating weakness of ageing.
As Mr. Taubes says in the book, it's not all about the calories though. A huge part of the problem these days is the massive consumption of carbohydrates. Carbohydrates raise blood sugar, which raises insulin levels, which promotes fat storage, inhibits release of energy from fat tissue and promotes inflammation, associated with next to all our "western diseases" like heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer's, fibromyalgia and so on. If you eat bread/pasta/rice/etc. 5 times a day because many small, supposedly healthy meals will help you loose weight, your insulin levels will be chronically high and it will be exceedingly hard to burn off any fat.
I know iWhatever probably saved Apple but really, what advantages have their products every had? I know the history (somewhat) but to me it seems that for every Apple product praised as the second coming of Christ, there has always been a better, competing product.
Another user just replied to another post I made, saying something along the lines of "Macs can run any OS, but OSX only runs on Macs". Is this true? If so, that is an artificially imposed limit by Apple to keep people buying their hardware despite them only really producing plastic cases and OSX. If OSX could be run on any hardware that can run Windows and Linux, I expect Apple would see a soul crushing dip in sales. Paying for a pretty OS on a pretty box is one thing. Paying for just the plastic casing though..
I used to run a PC in a cool case too with a sidewindow and leds and I think it looked bad ass too, but Apple is looking for something that doesn't say hardcore but balanced design and I think their stuff pulls that off as well.
Heh, I still have my Chieftec Dragon fulltower in the basement, complete with a shitload of fans, side window, cold cathode lights, the works. The reason I said Lian Li is that they have some incredibly smooth looking aluminum cases that would fit much better in some minimalistic design apartment (or Apple's commercials) than (personal opinion warning) Apple's rickety, cheap-looking plastic stuff.
Thanks for your reply, but you completely missed the mark. I am genuinely curious as to what advantages Apple offers and posted a couple of reasons as to why I can't really see any, except it's supposed "simpleness" and "it's what the young folk use"-factor which appeals to people like my parents.
So come on, what are the advantages? What is the reason people get so territorial whenever Apple is brought up?
No re: warranty. Secondly, you can run any OS on Apple hardware (I think you're confused by the fact that you can't run OSX on any hardware)
Really? You can't run OS X on any hardware, or at least any hardware that can run Windows? I didn't know this and if it's true, it's a huge weakness imposed by Apple to keep people who like OS X buying their hardware. If a Mac can run OS X, Win and Linux, then (barring artificial limitations) a computer containing the exact same hardware can surely do the same.
Again I have to ask, how is <Apple product in question> different from/better than <competing product>? When it comes to phones, I have had the questionable pleasure of using a Nokia N97 for a couple of months. I have also tried an iPhone 3G and a couple of HTC phones. My current phone is the HTC Desire and I must admit, I haven't loved a tech gadget this much since my SNES (hell, I can even play SNES games on it!). The closedness, lack of features and general asshattery of Apple just makes the HTC (with Android) a much more tempting choice, not to mention the immense amount of available apps and the powerful hardware.
As I posted further up, I used to get why Apple existed and did well. They filled a niche market by delivering hardware and software that performed certain tasks (video editing, Photoshop, etc.) better than a general purpose ("IBM") computer. Now though, an Apple computer is just a very expensive computer you can't really upgrade* in a shiny plastic case. It can run any OS and any software for that OS, as can any (much cheaper) computer I build to spec myself and stuff in a Lian Li case.
What are the advantages of Apple? Why is this flamewar still going strong, when Apple strictly speaking doesn't make anything but cases, an OS and the undeniably smooth but horribly locked-down iPhone (stripped/enlarged to produce iPod/iPad)? What's left to argue about..?
*Well, technically you can but doesn't warranties and such hinder you from doing such things freely?
I suggest, in interests of fairness, you now bitch how badly WIn 7 runs on a 2008 netbook...
I get the main point of your post, and I agree. In all fairness to Microsoft and all their *cough* previous escapades though, Windows 7 doesn't run bad at all on a 2008 laptop. In fact, Win7 doesn't run half bad on the 5 years old mid-end laptop I installed it on the other day, and runs very smooth on the 4 years old mid/high-end desktop computer at home.
Neither have I, because I value my freedom to buy and, you know.. own stuff almost as much as I value my hard-earned cash. I will never own an iPhone of any kind. I've used my fathers iPhone 3G a bit though to see what the big fuzz was about and my (subjective, I guess) conclusion is that my HTC Desire far outperforms the iPhone in every possible way relevant to my use (application availability (SNES/NES/GB emulators), connectivity, menu navigation, display quality, touch responsiveness, etc.).
Also.. why on Earth is Apple still around? I don't mean to be an uninformed ass but "back in the day", Apple computers were something wholly different. Different hardware, different OS, a lot of (specialized) software performed better thus companies doing design and such gladly payed to get the best tool for the job. These days though, an Apple computer is exactly the same as any other desktop computer except I don't control what goes into the fancy plastic casing.
Compared to building my own computer and stuffing it in a Lian Li case (which, by the way looks far more awesome than anything Apple ever made), what advantage(s) does an Apple computer have?
Except for the MagSafe. That shit is awesome, even if it's just a new application of an old idea.
I dream of the day when someone makes (and releases) an implantable blood glucose sensor. In October 2006, a company called Digital Angel was awarded a patent for an implantable, blood glucose measuring RFID-tag. From what I recall they even had a working device. The only downside was that due to scar tissue and encapsulation the chip needed to be removed every 6 months and a new one implanted, something any MD with a scalpel could do.
"Drive-thru"-surgery every 6 months to have constant blood glucose measurements? Yes please! Anyone know where this tech went? As a Type 1 Diabetic, it'd probably extend my lifespan by 10 years. Oh, and I could buy an RFID-reader and make my own data logger with graphs and biofeedback and everything!
Now if he could actually see with this device that'd be different, that's a bionic eye, but all he did was replace his false eye with a small streaming webcam. That's not a bionic eye anymore than a false arm with a webcam is a bionic arm.
First of all, I think it's awesome. Of the thousands upon thousands of people who have eye prosthetics, he is the first who both got the idea and actually got it made.
Second, he could see with this. Read up on Sensory Substitution, perhaps most relevant: the Tongue Display Unit. Currently at 25x25 resolution and a size of 3x3cm, the TDU is an electrode array placed on the tongue used to display information from other modalities through the tactile modality.
Wicab is currently working on higher resolution prototypes but research (going back 50 years) show that as little as 10x10 "taxels" is enough to recognize a familiar face. They are also theorizing about making the array wireless and putting it in a retainer-type mount. Imagine coupling this with the EyeBorg eye for anyone who has lost an eye. The TVSS (Tactile Visual Substitution System) is already working well enough to let users navigate and read signs etc. with a camera mounted on a pair of glasses. Imagine how much more natural the integration would be if the camera was in an eyepiece that looks around in sync with the remaining, working eye!
Isn't the event horizon the point at which the gravitational pull of a black hole becomes so powerful that not even light can escape? How on earth will feeding the black hole more mass make the event horizon go away? I thought more mass meant more gravity..
I don't think you really thought that through.. If we (being intelligent) create life, the ID'ers will just start screaming "AHA! Told you so! Life had to have an intelligent designer, it didn't just pop out of thin air now did it?". Effing morons.. =(
Bloated is not the right word. It's more that it looks like an overweight person running. It's not a pleasant sight.
Firefox is now like a mall cop trying to compete with an athlete. You can point out that it provides security, or that it has lots of handy stuff attached to his belt, but it doesn't change anything.
Try Opera for a week and you will only ever go back to check on cross-browser compatibility. Comes with it's own developer tool, Opera Dragonfly, which more than holds it's own against FireBug.
I would, as politely as can be done, suggest that you stop talking out of your ass about things you obviously know precious little about, apart from the "facts" (dipped in corn syrup and chocolate and rolled in sprinkles) you've been spoon fed by the AHA and their ilk.
Yes, malnutrition is bad for you. What on earth does that have to do with carbohydrates? I just had a huge salad of Chinese cabbage, broccoli, celery and 4 boiled eggs. I've also finished off at least 100g of paranuts today. Does it sound like my body isn't getting enough nutrients..?
Another thing you seem oblivious to is the fact that most vitamins are found in fatty meat. We have essential fatty acids, essential amino acids, but no need what so ever of dietary carbohydrates. That's right. What? You thought you got fat-soluble vitamins from low-/no-fat veggies and bread?
If you cared to actually educate yourself on the subject at hand, you'd know that we evolved to eat meat. In fact, we probably evolved because we had such a high density energy source available, and to get it we needed intelligence and cooperation. We ate a diet consisting almost entirely of meat and fat supplemented by nuts and berries (and the occasional apple now and then) for millions of years and we were fine. Archaeological findings tell us that primitive man was bigger and built more solidly than us. Hell, they didn't even have tooth cavities, because they hardly ate any carbs.
Then comes agriculture, and the industrial revolution. In the decades prior to ~1970 about 11-13% of the American population was obese. Then, Ansel Keys and his fat-phobic peers got their way (and private funding) and in the next 10-20 years the percentage of obese Americans skyrocketed. Same with diabetes, ADHD/ADD, and a host of other so-called "life style" diseases.
Sure, historical evidence and correlation is not the same as a double-blind trial but at some point the numbers in favor of one side of the debacle become so overwhelmingly out of proportion, you just can't ignore the facts anymore. Oh, and for 40 years now AHA, ADA, ACA, etc. have put countless millions (if not billions) of dollars into proving their "saturated fats==high cholesterol==heart disease"-theory, without one single reliable study confirming any relationship between cholesterol and heart disease.
Enough about that, you're not going to listen to reason anyways. Regarding your advice to see my dietician.. Well, I have Diabetes Type 1 (the insulin dependent, "WTF happened?"-type) and yet I am adviced to eat precious little protein compared to how active I am, next to no fat and at least 60% of my daily energy intake from carbohydrates.
Do you know what happens if a Type 1 diabetic tries to eat that much carbohydrates every day? I die. Horribly. First I lose my eyesight, then neuropathy sets in with burning pains so intense it's better to have the extremeties amputated (which is what is done). Then the kidneys fail, and I am left a broken husk of a man. This is near inevitable even with blood glucose measurements several times a day, regular (according to the State) well composed meals, etc.
You know what happens when a Type 1 diabetic eats low carb? Kidneys work flawlessly, blood glucose is completely stable 24 hours a day, concentration and energy levels are higher and more stable than for years. What's even better, I'm taking one shot of 12-hour insulin each morning, down from 12-hour insulin morning and night and quick acting insulin at every damn meal.
Our computing resources are growing faster than we can use them.
Oh really? I think Microsoft, Dell, Intel et al. would disagree! If I buy a brand-spanking-new laptop with 4GB of RAM (and allow all the factory installed crapware to stay), FireFox, MS Office, Windows Mediaplayer, etc. all seem to go out of their way to eat all my computing resources.
Dedicated Opera user here, though I have all sorts of browsers installed since I do web development. Back in the day (ok, I'm not that old) I used IE6 and Firefox (I think.. might still have been using Navigator at this point). IE starts quickly and is responsive and simplistic, FF has features IE6 can't even dream about but is sluggish and renders my computer utterly useless for anything else for a while before crashing catastrophically.
Then along comes Opera. Quick, responsive, no-bullshit GUI, and a feature set covering everything I want and need (mouse gestures? INSTANT LOVE), and then some. There was no way back, and there still isn't. It has a developer tool easily rivaling FireBug, it's GUI and general use is slick and smooth yet "simple" and solid (semi-subjective, I know), it has the fastest rendering engine, the fastest JavaScript engine, it is the most standard compliant browser, and I routinely leave it running for 2-3 weeks straight with hours of daily use shutting it down only when my box needs a reboot and have to date never seen Opera use more than 400MB of memory, or crash outside of beta.
In addition, there is Opera Mobile which brings the full Opera experience to your not-antiquated phone, Opera Mini which along with their free Turbo-service brings a decent browsing experience even to horribly outdated phones, and Opera Devices which lets you surf on stuff like your Nintendo DSi.
Also, Opera is Norwegian. You have lost, simple as that. YEAH! B-)
I'd imagine it costs a whole lot more to keep an aged Alzheimer's patient alive (and relatively happy) that it costs to pay a retired individual who is capable of caring for themselves to do just that. And besides, who cares about expenses in this regard? Yes, I know, everyone cares about money, but the few bucks I'll get once I retire will absolutely pale in comparison to the amount of money I have payed due to all sorts of taxes (I live in Norway, where I pay ~36% income tax, 24% tax on anything I buy, ~80% tax on tobacco, alcohol and fossil fuels, etc.).
Good job being an ass ignoring the established facts surrounding carbohydrates, cholesterol, dietary fats, etc. to make a snide remark. You are sooo cool!
My point was that cutting back on carbs and eating like we've evolved to will lessen the effects of ADD/ADHD, if not cure it all together. I saw a documentary about a school in Denmark that took on kids who were completely and utterly lost in the traditional education system, kids who suffered from said diagnosis. These kids were put on fairly strict low-carb diets and given snacks and lunch at school, and their parents were educated in the benefits of low-carb as well as how to put it into every-day practice.
The result? Every single one of the kids bettered significantly. Not just some vague statistical number somewhere, but a completely obvious trend where a school full of kids with grades averaging 1-2 (on a scale from 1-6, where 2 is the lowest passing grade) all of a sudden had an over-all average exceeding the national average.
This article seems like just another one of those "Well, we've been pushing carbs as healthy for 40 years so we can't take that back.. Oh! Research that shows some potential correlation to something other than our advice! *throw craploads of money at said research*"-situations. Sure, pesticides likely don't do you much good. My point is, why worry about the splinter in your toe when your leg is obviously hurting because you have a freaggin bullethole in your calf?
Yes, Sweden is clearly different! This is why they, at the urging of corporate giants like Sony, changed the law (ipred) a few weeks before taking the PirateBay guys to court, so they could have any basis at all for a conviction. Go Justice!
Slashdot Mirror
Finally! Someone besides myself who posts something related to sensory substitution/augmentation! ^^
The compass belt would be a cool add-on to a lot of games. Make one that works like the linked one (with real world input) but add a Bluetooth interface so you can also get information from games and such. From what I've read about the (crazy) level of integration with these types of devices, I'd bet something like that would add a very decent upgrade to the sense of immersion (if not exactly useful information) to many games.
What about Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation? I tried this with a 9V battery and a couple of makeshift electrodes fashioned from aluminum foil and duct tape. Ok, so I had no control of the current being passed through my head (which I believe should be <1,5mA) but when I popped on the electrodes, stood up with my eyes closed and flipped the switch.. Hell, I almost fell into my TV, and my friend who tried it actually did end up on the floor. It really does tip your balance in the direction of the anode, and I can imagine using this with f.ex. driving or flying simulator type games would be quite the experience.
Perhaps a headband or hat of some sort with proximity sensors and small button vibrators? Something like the Haptic Radar project only discreet enough that us nerds and geeks at least would consider wearing it now and then even when not gaming (because sensomotoric correlations are the key to integration). Like with the compass belt idea, add Bluetooth and the ability for games to override the real-world information. Perhaps an added sense of distance (just like the headband works in the real world) to walls and objects in an FPS game?
You do realize that Atkins has been roundly criticized in the literature by every nutritional authority, right? The National Academy of Sciences, the AMA, the ADA, the ACS, the AHA, the Cleveland Clinic, Johns Hopkins, the American Kidney Fund, the American College of Sports Medicine, and the National Institutes of Health has all criticized the Atkins plan. See the AtkinsExposed website [atkinsexposed.org] I linked above.
I have read the link and it didn't exactly convince me. Every person quoted in that article uses a horrid Strawman-argument. Taubes repeatedly says in interviews, debates and lectures that overeating obviously causes "excess accumulation of fatty tissue". The entire article seems to be based around the idiotic Strawman that that you can eat 10.000 calories of fat a day and loose weight which obviously isn't the case.
You can find a handful of people with "Dr." before their name who will tell you than smoking cigarettes is fine and dandy, or with "PhD" afterward who will tell you that climate change is a hoax -- or that 9/11 was a controlled demolition, or that we never went to the moon, or whatever. This does not change the science.
Agreed. This goes both ways though, especially when there is funding involved. In fact, most doctors risk huge lawsuits and revoked medical licenses if they recommend anything but the established high-carb diet and something does indeed go wrong (at least here in Scandinavia), no matter how stupid or unrelated it might be. This put together with the fact that ADA/AHA/ACA/etc. (just like the Norwegian government) can't suddenly start funding research trying to prove that said governmental instances has indeed been killing people for 40 years paints a pretty clear picture of why so many medical professionals are stuck in their dogma. Also, God complex. Again, due to my diabetes I know all to well that medical doctors and nutritionists quite nearly have a seizure if you so much as ask "why?" or "what if?" because there is no bloody way their 30-50 years old "facts" might be wrong.
No, in fact insulin has an anti-inflammatory effect [liebertonline.com] (see also here [buffalo.edu].)
Yes, sure. This is why Dr. Atkins, Dr. Hexeberg and Drs. Eades to name a few have treated thousands of deadly ill heart disease (inflammation of blood vessels) patients with a low carb diet and seen time and time again full recovery. This is why reducing carbohydrate intake lets fibromyalgia (basically inflammation of muscle tissue) sufferers get back to living life.
I'm sick of that argument, because fat never went out! This is the biggest lie in Taubes' collection of whoppers. There was a tiny drop, about 8%, in the use of added fats and oils between 1993 and 1997 at the height of the "low fat" push -- followed by a 17% increase between 1997 and 2000 [usda.gov]. Fat intake increased between 1971 and 1991 [cdc.gov]. I repeat: when you're overeating by 500 calories a day, shuffling around the proportions of macronutrients is re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. (What did dip slightly was percent of calories as fat -- because our overeating of refined grain products grew slightly faster than our overeating of added fats and oils. Overeating being the key here.)
It all started in the 1950'es with Ancel Keys and his "7 countries study" that showed a clear correlation between heart disease mortality and fat intake, which was in fact a "22 countries study" that showed absolutely no such correlation at all. In fact, in the original data, countries like Greece and Norway consumed a huge amount of fat and had little to no heart disease at all but because of his need to be right and receive further funding, he did what any respected scientist would do and cherry-picked the data he needed.
You don't strike me as an idiot. Compare what your parents or grandparents ate to what you find on display in most supermarkets these days. My gra
Holy crap, I meant "a pound of steak"! I was proof reading my post and clicked "Submit" instead of "Continue Editing". Sorry, I do not "eat stake". -__-'
*sigh* So what about Dr. Robert Atkins? Dr. Michael R. Eades and his wife Dr. Mary Dan Eades? Dr. Sofie Hexeberg? Professor Wolfgang Lutz? Dr. Fedon Lindberg? Dr. Torkil P. Andersen? I could go on, and on, and on, but you get the point.
No, in fact the bulk of your caloric intake should be complex carbohydrates. Now, highly refined carbs do make it easier to overeat -- as do fatty foods. But the bulk of our problem is very simple: we eat something on the order of 25% more calories now than we did three or four decades ago. When you're overeating by 500 calories a day, shuffling around the proportions of macronutrients is re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Yes, it's almost impossible to gain weight without consuming too many calories total, but have you read or heard any of the science Mr. Taubes often quotes? There are many places around the world where children die from malnutrition while their mothers are overweight. Now, most mothers would easily starve themselves to feed their children. How do you explain the coexistence of malnutrition and obesity within a community?
Yeah, that's why you see so many fat Japanese people, all that rice. And why we've had all these "western diseases" for centuries, as we ate a grain-centered diet since, like, the beginning of human civilization. Oh, wait a minute...obesity rates in Japan, where the typical diet gets about 55 [diet-i.com] to 60% [kikkoman.com] of calories from carbs, are about 1/10 those of the U.S. [nationmaster.com] -- but are rising as carb levels decrease and fat and protein levels increase. And the fact that for most of human history[*] the majority of the human race has eaten a grain-centered high carbohydrate diet -- these "diseases of affluence" were awfully rare until the 20th century. ([*]To be taken literally: history starts with writing, which comes after the Neolithic revolution.)
Japanese people also work far harder than most us Westeners, in addition to eating a lot of fish, shellfish, eggs and meat. Their overall sugar consumption is also faaar lower than most so-called "Americanized" societies. Obviously you should get a fair bit of complex carbs and it's not impossible to live well with quite a bit of them (all else being fairly optimal).
As I said, inflammation is one of the primary causes of pretty much every "life-style" disease out there, which is a fact. Insulin is pro-inflammatory, as is an Omega-3/Omega-6 balance too far in favor of Omega-6. You know how to get a lot of Omega-3? Fish, shellfish, eggs, (grass fed) red meats, etc. You know who eats a lot of these things? The Japanese.
Also, what we have done in recorded history has nothing to do with our biology or evolution. The fact is, we've been growing crops for the past ~10.000 years which in evolutionary terms is just barely a blip on the radar. Hunter/gatherers collected fruits and berries when they could and fattened up for winter, but otherwise ate what the hunters brought home. After all, wild carbohydrates aren't exactly "in stock" all year around while meat and fish is.
You know who has the lowest incidents of heart disease, stroke, diabetes and so on? The Eskimo, Inuit, Masai, and other "primitive" populations who have next-to no carbohydrates and a ton of meat and fats in their diets. These people aren't special, they are part of the exact same gene pool as us.
I'm sick of this debate, because all that should be necessary is to look at rates of obesity and diabetes before and after we suddenly got all the fatphobic propaganda. Hint: diabetes was almost a non-issue and obesity levels had been stable for decades. Out goes the fat (obviously replaced by carbs, because they had to be replaced by something), and BAM, obesity/diabetes epidemic.
And a high protein meal will also raise insulin levels [medbio.info] -- good, since insulin is necessary for uptake of amino acids protein synthesis.. blablabla..
I don't even know why I bother responding, but if you live on a what is, in essence a starvation diet and do hard physical labor pretty much every waking hour of the day, well of course you're going to be skinny.
Bacon, butter, sour cream, cheese... Why not go all the way, just leave out the potatoes, and pour pure fat into your throat? ;)
I guess you're either trolling, or ignorant. Feel free to check out the blog of M.D. Michael R. Eades at http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/ as well as his books, and "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes (and a heap of other great books, none of which I can recall at the moment).
Natural fats aren't bad for your health. No, not even saturated fat. Do yourself and those close to you the most important favor you'll ever do and read some science on nutrition instead of gobbeling up the official nutritional guidelines with an unhealthy side-dish of insulin-raising, unnecessary carbohydrates.
As Gary Taubes, author of "Good Calories, Bad Calories" says, workout out makes you hungry. Everyone has heard about "Working up an appetite" but for some strange reason forgets it when they talk about exercise. If you just eat based on hunger, working out will do nothing to lower your weight. It will of course help cardiovascular health, and weight lifting helps keep your metabolism and good hormones up, your stress hormones down, helps your mental health and staves off the debilitating weakness of ageing.
As Mr. Taubes says in the book, it's not all about the calories though. A huge part of the problem these days is the massive consumption of carbohydrates. Carbohydrates raise blood sugar, which raises insulin levels, which promotes fat storage, inhibits release of energy from fat tissue and promotes inflammation, associated with next to all our "western diseases" like heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer's, fibromyalgia and so on. If you eat bread/pasta/rice/etc. 5 times a day because many small, supposedly healthy meals will help you loose weight, your insulin levels will be chronically high and it will be exceedingly hard to burn off any fat.
I know iWhatever probably saved Apple but really, what advantages have their products every had? I know the history (somewhat) but to me it seems that for every Apple product praised as the second coming of Christ, there has always been a better, competing product.
Another user just replied to another post I made, saying something along the lines of "Macs can run any OS, but OSX only runs on Macs". Is this true? If so, that is an artificially imposed limit by Apple to keep people buying their hardware despite them only really producing plastic cases and OSX. If OSX could be run on any hardware that can run Windows and Linux, I expect Apple would see a soul crushing dip in sales. Paying for a pretty OS on a pretty box is one thing. Paying for just the plastic casing though..
I used to run a PC in a cool case too with a sidewindow and leds and I think it looked bad ass too, but Apple is looking for something that doesn't say hardcore but balanced design and I think their stuff pulls that off as well.
Heh, I still have my Chieftec Dragon fulltower in the basement, complete with a shitload of fans, side window, cold cathode lights, the works. The reason I said Lian Li is that they have some incredibly smooth looking aluminum cases that would fit much better in some minimalistic design apartment (or Apple's commercials) than (personal opinion warning) Apple's rickety, cheap-looking plastic stuff.
Thanks for your reply, but you completely missed the mark. I am genuinely curious as to what advantages Apple offers and posted a couple of reasons as to why I can't really see any, except it's supposed "simpleness" and "it's what the young folk use"-factor which appeals to people like my parents.
So come on, what are the advantages? What is the reason people get so territorial whenever Apple is brought up?
No re: warranty. Secondly, you can run any OS on Apple hardware (I think you're confused by the fact that you can't run OSX on any hardware)
Really? You can't run OS X on any hardware, or at least any hardware that can run Windows? I didn't know this and if it's true, it's a huge weakness imposed by Apple to keep people who like OS X buying their hardware. If a Mac can run OS X, Win and Linux, then (barring artificial limitations) a computer containing the exact same hardware can surely do the same.
Again I have to ask, how is <Apple product in question> different from/better than <competing product>? When it comes to phones, I have had the questionable pleasure of using a Nokia N97 for a couple of months. I have also tried an iPhone 3G and a couple of HTC phones. My current phone is the HTC Desire and I must admit, I haven't loved a tech gadget this much since my SNES (hell, I can even play SNES games on it!). The closedness, lack of features and general asshattery of Apple just makes the HTC (with Android) a much more tempting choice, not to mention the immense amount of available apps and the powerful hardware.
As I posted further up, I used to get why Apple existed and did well. They filled a niche market by delivering hardware and software that performed certain tasks (video editing, Photoshop, etc.) better than a general purpose ("IBM") computer. Now though, an Apple computer is just a very expensive computer you can't really upgrade* in a shiny plastic case. It can run any OS and any software for that OS, as can any (much cheaper) computer I build to spec myself and stuff in a Lian Li case.
What are the advantages of Apple? Why is this flamewar still going strong, when Apple strictly speaking doesn't make anything but cases, an OS and the undeniably smooth but horribly locked-down iPhone (stripped/enlarged to produce iPod/iPad)? What's left to argue about..?
*Well, technically you can but doesn't warranties and such hinder you from doing such things freely?
I suggest, in interests of fairness, you now bitch how badly WIn 7 runs on a 2008 netbook...
I get the main point of your post, and I agree. In all fairness to Microsoft and all their *cough* previous escapades though, Windows 7 doesn't run bad at all on a 2008 laptop. In fact, Win7 doesn't run half bad on the 5 years old mid-end laptop I installed it on the other day, and runs very smooth on the 4 years old mid/high-end desktop computer at home.
Neither have I, because I value my freedom to buy and, you know.. own stuff almost as much as I value my hard-earned cash. I will never own an iPhone of any kind. I've used my fathers iPhone 3G a bit though to see what the big fuzz was about and my (subjective, I guess) conclusion is that my HTC Desire far outperforms the iPhone in every possible way relevant to my use (application availability (SNES/NES/GB emulators), connectivity, menu navigation, display quality, touch responsiveness, etc.).
Also.. why on Earth is Apple still around? I don't mean to be an uninformed ass but "back in the day", Apple computers were something wholly different. Different hardware, different OS, a lot of (specialized) software performed better thus companies doing design and such gladly payed to get the best tool for the job. These days though, an Apple computer is exactly the same as any other desktop computer except I don't control what goes into the fancy plastic casing.
Compared to building my own computer and stuffing it in a Lian Li case (which, by the way looks far more awesome than anything Apple ever made), what advantage(s) does an Apple computer have?
Except for the MagSafe. That shit is awesome, even if it's just a new application of an old idea.
I dream of the day when someone makes (and releases) an implantable blood glucose sensor. In October 2006, a company called Digital Angel was awarded a patent for an implantable, blood glucose measuring RFID-tag. From what I recall they even had a working device. The only downside was that due to scar tissue and encapsulation the chip needed to be removed every 6 months and a new one implanted, something any MD with a scalpel could do.
"Drive-thru"-surgery every 6 months to have constant blood glucose measurements? Yes please! Anyone know where this tech went? As a Type 1 Diabetic, it'd probably extend my lifespan by 10 years. Oh, and I could buy an RFID-reader and make my own data logger with graphs and biofeedback and everything!
Now if he could actually see with this device that'd be different, that's a bionic eye, but all he did was replace his false eye with a small streaming webcam. That's not a bionic eye anymore than a false arm with a webcam is a bionic arm.
First of all, I think it's awesome. Of the thousands upon thousands of people who have eye prosthetics, he is the first who both got the idea and actually got it made.
Second, he could see with this. Read up on Sensory Substitution, perhaps most relevant: the Tongue Display Unit. Currently at 25x25 resolution and a size of 3x3cm, the TDU is an electrode array placed on the tongue used to display information from other modalities through the tactile modality.
Wicab is currently working on higher resolution prototypes but research (going back 50 years) show that as little as 10x10 "taxels" is enough to recognize a familiar face. They are also theorizing about making the array wireless and putting it in a retainer-type mount. Imagine coupling this with the EyeBorg eye for anyone who has lost an eye. The TVSS (Tactile Visual Substitution System) is already working well enough to let users navigate and read signs etc. with a camera mounted on a pair of glasses. Imagine how much more natural the integration would be if the camera was in an eyepiece that looks around in sync with the remaining, working eye!
Also, pure freaggin Terminator awesomeness!
Isn't the event horizon the point at which the gravitational pull of a black hole becomes so powerful that not even light can escape? How on earth will feeding the black hole more mass make the event horizon go away? I thought more mass meant more gravity..
Hero? Tattoo? HD2? Legend? Desire?
I don't think you really thought that through.. If we (being intelligent) create life, the ID'ers will just start screaming "AHA! Told you so! Life had to have an intelligent designer, it didn't just pop out of thin air now did it?". Effing morons.. =(
Bloated is not the right word. It's more that it looks like an overweight person running. It's not a pleasant sight. Firefox is now like a mall cop trying to compete with an athlete. You can point out that it provides security, or that it has lots of handy stuff attached to his belt, but it doesn't change anything.
Best. Analogy. Ever.
Try Opera for a week and you will only ever go back to check on cross-browser compatibility. Comes with it's own developer tool, Opera Dragonfly, which more than holds it's own against FireBug.
I would, as politely as can be done, suggest that you stop talking out of your ass about things you obviously know precious little about, apart from the "facts" (dipped in corn syrup and chocolate and rolled in sprinkles) you've been spoon fed by the AHA and their ilk.
Yes, malnutrition is bad for you. What on earth does that have to do with carbohydrates? I just had a huge salad of Chinese cabbage, broccoli, celery and 4 boiled eggs. I've also finished off at least 100g of paranuts today. Does it sound like my body isn't getting enough nutrients..?
Another thing you seem oblivious to is the fact that most vitamins are found in fatty meat. We have essential fatty acids, essential amino acids, but no need what so ever of dietary carbohydrates. That's right. What? You thought you got fat-soluble vitamins from low-/no-fat veggies and bread?
If you cared to actually educate yourself on the subject at hand, you'd know that we evolved to eat meat. In fact, we probably evolved because we had such a high density energy source available, and to get it we needed intelligence and cooperation. We ate a diet consisting almost entirely of meat and fat supplemented by nuts and berries (and the occasional apple now and then) for millions of years and we were fine. Archaeological findings tell us that primitive man was bigger and built more solidly than us. Hell, they didn't even have tooth cavities, because they hardly ate any carbs.
Then comes agriculture, and the industrial revolution. In the decades prior to ~1970 about 11-13% of the American population was obese. Then, Ansel Keys and his fat-phobic peers got their way (and private funding) and in the next 10-20 years the percentage of obese Americans skyrocketed. Same with diabetes, ADHD/ADD, and a host of other so-called "life style" diseases.
Sure, historical evidence and correlation is not the same as a double-blind trial but at some point the numbers in favor of one side of the debacle become so overwhelmingly out of proportion, you just can't ignore the facts anymore. Oh, and for 40 years now AHA, ADA, ACA, etc. have put countless millions (if not billions) of dollars into proving their "saturated fats==high cholesterol==heart disease"-theory, without one single reliable study confirming any relationship between cholesterol and heart disease.
Enough about that, you're not going to listen to reason anyways. Regarding your advice to see my dietician.. Well, I have Diabetes Type 1 (the insulin dependent, "WTF happened?"-type) and yet I am adviced to eat precious little protein compared to how active I am, next to no fat and at least 60% of my daily energy intake from carbohydrates.
Do you know what happens if a Type 1 diabetic tries to eat that much carbohydrates every day? I die. Horribly. First I lose my eyesight, then neuropathy sets in with burning pains so intense it's better to have the extremeties amputated (which is what is done). Then the kidneys fail, and I am left a broken husk of a man. This is near inevitable even with blood glucose measurements several times a day, regular (according to the State) well composed meals, etc.
You know what happens when a Type 1 diabetic eats low carb? Kidneys work flawlessly, blood glucose is completely stable 24 hours a day, concentration and energy levels are higher and more stable than for years. What's even better, I'm taking one shot of 12-hour insulin each morning, down from 12-hour insulin morning and night and quick acting insulin at every damn meal.
Our computing resources are growing faster than we can use them.
Oh really? I think Microsoft, Dell, Intel et al. would disagree! If I buy a brand-spanking-new laptop with 4GB of RAM (and allow all the factory installed crapware to stay), FireFox, MS Office, Windows Mediaplayer, etc. all seem to go out of their way to eat all my computing resources.
Dedicated Opera user here, though I have all sorts of browsers installed since I do web development. Back in the day (ok, I'm not that old) I used IE6 and Firefox (I think.. might still have been using Navigator at this point). IE starts quickly and is responsive and simplistic, FF has features IE6 can't even dream about but is sluggish and renders my computer utterly useless for anything else for a while before crashing catastrophically.
Then along comes Opera. Quick, responsive, no-bullshit GUI, and a feature set covering everything I want and need (mouse gestures? INSTANT LOVE), and then some. There was no way back, and there still isn't. It has a developer tool easily rivaling FireBug, it's GUI and general use is slick and smooth yet "simple" and solid (semi-subjective, I know), it has the fastest rendering engine, the fastest JavaScript engine, it is the most standard compliant browser, and I routinely leave it running for 2-3 weeks straight with hours of daily use shutting it down only when my box needs a reboot and have to date never seen Opera use more than 400MB of memory, or crash outside of beta.
In addition, there is Opera Mobile which brings the full Opera experience to your not-antiquated phone, Opera Mini which along with their free Turbo-service brings a decent browsing experience even to horribly outdated phones, and Opera Devices which lets you surf on stuff like your Nintendo DSi.
Also, Opera is Norwegian. You have lost, simple as that. YEAH! B-)
I'd imagine it costs a whole lot more to keep an aged Alzheimer's patient alive (and relatively happy) that it costs to pay a retired individual who is capable of caring for themselves to do just that. And besides, who cares about expenses in this regard? Yes, I know, everyone cares about money, but the few bucks I'll get once I retire will absolutely pale in comparison to the amount of money I have payed due to all sorts of taxes (I live in Norway, where I pay ~36% income tax, 24% tax on anything I buy, ~80% tax on tobacco, alcohol and fossil fuels, etc.).
Good job being an ass ignoring the established facts surrounding carbohydrates, cholesterol, dietary fats, etc. to make a snide remark. You are sooo cool!
My point was that cutting back on carbs and eating like we've evolved to will lessen the effects of ADD/ADHD, if not cure it all together. I saw a documentary about a school in Denmark that took on kids who were completely and utterly lost in the traditional education system, kids who suffered from said diagnosis. These kids were put on fairly strict low-carb diets and given snacks and lunch at school, and their parents were educated in the benefits of low-carb as well as how to put it into every-day practice.
The result? Every single one of the kids bettered significantly. Not just some vague statistical number somewhere, but a completely obvious trend where a school full of kids with grades averaging 1-2 (on a scale from 1-6, where 2 is the lowest passing grade) all of a sudden had an over-all average exceeding the national average.
This article seems like just another one of those "Well, we've been pushing carbs as healthy for 40 years so we can't take that back.. Oh! Research that shows some potential correlation to something other than our advice! *throw craploads of money at said research*"-situations. Sure, pesticides likely don't do you much good. My point is, why worry about the splinter in your toe when your leg is obviously hurting because you have a freaggin bullethole in your calf?
Yes, Sweden is clearly different! This is why they, at the urging of corporate giants like Sony, changed the law (ipred) a few weeks before taking the PirateBay guys to court, so they could have any basis at all for a conviction. Go Justice!