And all the antivaxxers I ever knew sure like recreational substances too.
-
To be fair, how many anti-vaxx haters are vegan? And I am pro-vaccination. But also it would be nice if we could solve the whole pandemic problem a bit more completely, rather than slapping a band-aid on while sprinting for the next round.
Wait, what?
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
Antivax but do random shrooms/lsd/blow from strangers and buy their weed illegally
-
Antivax but do random shrooms/lsd/blow from strangers and buy their weed illegally
but we dont know whats in those vaccines lol
-
Thanks, I'll use that for my own knowledge!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Sure or let her know. That's like cheese, yogurt, eggs, dark leafy greens (best source), or natto if she can handle it haha.
-
Yikes, dawg.
The brain is the body. They aren't separate.
I brought up caloric excess in my other comment. I'm aware caloric excess causes weight gain simplisticly, but like I said, that is a simplistic take that ignores eveything else about the body and how people function as bodies. It's a great attitude if you have an eating disorder or want to punish people for being fat though while ignoring their vitamin needs.
Food cravings are physiological in nature. Why people even WANT to eat when they already know about calories is what matters.
Foods are made of vitamins, minerals, proteins, carbs, fats (which many are vitamins), and probably stuff I'm not thinking of. Plus we eat stuff like microplastics, dust in the air, lint, whatever incidental things. And then we also have a microbiome that interacts with all this, and that respond adaptively to pathogens, eg hydrogen peroxide producing bacteria, plus the pathogens themselves. We come into contact with pathogens a LOT, and most of the time our immune system just deals with it, it's not a big deal. Same with cancer actually.
There's stuff going on under the hood, is my point, and we don't know what our cellular buddies are dealing with and if they need more of a certain vitamin or not, they don't burden us with minutiae. We just think, "fuuuuck, a goat cheese hummus salad would slap right now," because biochemical pathways in our brain light up and we start feeling hunger.
Calories follow basic thermodynamics, yes, but your body is very complex. The goal isn't thin and malnourished and sick, the goal is usually healthy and fit and feeling good.
And if you’re burning more energy than you take in, your stores are going to deplete
This is what I mean by simplistic. You wave your hand and say your body is simply "burning energy," when it is actually an endlessly intricate bioelectrochemical dance between entire cities of unicellular life and tiny multicellular life (and some viruses) with whole lives of their own. It's crazy what happens inside us and how we adapt.
There is actually a lot of literature (like since before the 50s) on fat soluble vitamins and I linked some elsewhere itt for general reading on how it relates to insulin and Ozempic in simple terms. That you don't know that, that I know more than you, is obvious and you should probably stop externalizing. There's also tons of modern dieticians and nutritionists (with doctorates) who practice this exact philosophy, and indeed it is what our entire recommended daily intake is based on.
Supplements are made from food, especially the ones I listed. Go look at the ingredient labels. And people know they can get vitamins from food and can look that up, as that is common knowledge.
They don't HAVE to take a stranger's advice lmfao.
Again there's no safety issues with the supplements I was talking about. I'm aware of which supplements are more dangerous.
We didn't evolve to breathe car exhaust every day and we do, so maybe there are external oressure we have these days we didn'thave before. 0I think our bodies are very adaptable given the wide range of biomes (incl sun exposure/vitamin d availability) we occupy, and we might need some extra vitamins every now and then. Supplement or whole food, either way.
People overdose on selenium with brazil nuts pretty often, because it takes so few to overdose and they don't realize. Arctic explorers ate a ton of polar bear liver with 1,000,000 times recommended retinol in one bite, one died and the other's feet sloughed off and almost died. You yourself simply don't eat food sources that will kill you, because everything you eat is from a super market lol and safe. Some whole foods can kill with vitamin dosages and can vary widely in their dose. With supplements, you know the exact amounts and are somewhat less likely to "overdose" based on that alone. Plus, you can take vitamins individually/independently for a while and see how your body responds to know if that specific vitamin is helpful or not, then choose a whole food source once you understand what vitamins you need.
Drs say that because they don't want you to take retinol in excess or be careless with your doses. It's okay to take a normal daily dose. Some doctors have eating disorders and fat phobia too by the way, and those doctors tend to be pretty ignorant about fat soluble vitamins and nutrition itself. And again, vitamin k has no upper threshold at all. We inject it into newborns at pretty high doses and have since the 60s. You aren't going to get "toxic levels" of vitamin e or coq10 in your body either lol unless you deliberately megadose.
Ps liver and heart are good whole food sources of these vitamins
Pss laughable you criticize recommending vitamins when people here want to casually take Ozempic because their favorite anorexic celeb did it and looks great (on tv with filters and editing). And just shows your anger is misplaced
I've enjoyed reading this discussion. I would like to contribute that the most significant factor in excessive obesity isn't a typically a nutrient deficiency, or even a moral failing in CICO - it's carbohydrate addiction.
Yes, hunger can be driven by low-levels of essential nutrition, pica during pregnancy is a great example of that. Many people are over-fed and under-nourished, so when they get hungry they continue to go to their deficient food source (probably something carbohydrate heavy).
-
You must be from Ontario.
I am indeed.
-
I am indeed.
Thought so with all that center of the universe stuff. Canada is a big country.
-
Could you direct me to the paper where it was proven? There seems to be a notable amount of bad journalism and broad misrepresentation of the science on this topic.
We are basically discussing whether or not obesity is an inescapable condemnation, so we should not sensationalize the topic whatsoever, and we should especially not present it as a fact if it is not a fact
Found it. It was older than I thought, though: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08165-7
-
Can it be induced by media consumption and cult behavior?
Or are they all kids that had it beaten out of them, but never properly treated, and now we all have to deal with the aftermath.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The defiance thing itself is induced by being a half-sentient talking ape that doesnt like being told things like "No!" "Thats bad, dont do that!" In terms of their actions. The antivaxers also like to layer in government mistrust and religious faith levels of i-must-be-right but the core of defiance is just that people dont like feeling shitty and have poor instinctual coping methods for it.
Its a fairly universal copout for humans to avoid feelings of shame and embarrassment or punishment. Nobody on the planet likes feeling stupid or in the wrong. So when confronted with these feelings some common stategies are out right lying to others or ourselves, or constructing a delusional warped narrative subjective reality in which they're actually somehow in the right through mental gymnastics, or by rejecting the claim of wrongness through formal argument, or using social dominance plays to forcefully dismiss claims of wrongdoing.
Usually people find a strange mixture of multiple of these strategies in emotional combative arguments and coping with their aftermath.
In an ideal world people would be able to instantly accept blame and fault for wrongdoing, eat he feelings of shame and self improve without trying to weasle their way out of punishment if they think they can get away with it. A properly adjusted adult who has eaten their fair share of humble pie over heir life encroaches on that kind of humility and willingness to update their assumptions given evidence, is able to say "oh shit I was wrong about that, huh? My bad." Or "the science nerds who study these things probably have more authority on the matter than I do, I'll default to their ideas." This however, is not an ideal world.
Children have zero impulse control and are barely sentient enough to construct coherent sentences or internal monologues. Their tiny brains are still developing and so they get a free pass more or less when it comes to being defiant little shits defaulting to instinctual ape copout strategies. all kids have their bad moments and are still learning. The problem is when they never stop defaulting to these things in adulthood.
-
Found it. It was older than I thought, though: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08165-7
Righteous, thank you! I’m in the muck right now at work but I’ll give it a read when I can
-
While your point is technically true, you're ignoring the bigger picture. Some people are genetically predetermined to having an uncontrollable appetite. We're talking about something that for some people is so extreme it's worse than the worst addictions. Willpower is just outright a nonstarter, especially when you factor in the presence of our toxic food environment (ie., the way super markets are so stuffed full of junk food and junk food advertising that it becomes virtually guaranteed that the vast majority of people will habitually eat poorly).
Ozempic is absolutely an appropriate choice for people who struggle with appetite control. It may not be perfect, and ultimately it is best to do whatever we can for lifestyle interventions, but sometimes we just have to work with what we've got too.
Did you even bother to read what I wrote instead of reiterating points I already made?
-
When scientists warned that milk could be contaminated with bird flu and pasteurized milk was safe, they started drinking raw milk en masse. There is no logic for them.
And then, a few of the less dense ones realized that raw milk was dangerous and they could reduce the risk by... boiling it.
But they won't drink pastuerized milk.
-
I've enjoyed reading this discussion. I would like to contribute that the most significant factor in excessive obesity isn't a typically a nutrient deficiency, or even a moral failing in CICO - it's carbohydrate addiction.
Yes, hunger can be driven by low-levels of essential nutrition, pica during pregnancy is a great example of that. Many people are over-fed and under-nourished, so when they get hungry they continue to go to their deficient food source (probably something carbohydrate heavy).
Addictions aren't real, or at least not like how we thought of them in the 90s.
It is an imbalance of carbohydrates and "bad" fats (no such things but in excess they become "bad") that your body needs other vitamins to deal with. It's not an "addiction," the word is meant to demonize and scare people, and it's fat phobia to call it that imo.
No food has everything we need in it.
-
Addictions aren't real, or at least not like how we thought of them in the 90s.
It is an imbalance of carbohydrates and "bad" fats (no such things but in excess they become "bad") that your body needs other vitamins to deal with. It's not an "addiction," the word is meant to demonize and scare people, and it's fat phobia to call it that imo.
No food has everything we need in it.
Addictions are real things in both my experience and reading - can you explain how they are not real?
Carbohydrates are not necessary for human nutrition, so there is no such thing as a carbohydrate imbalance.
Eating saturated fat does not become bad at any level of consumption.
Meat has everything we need in it, its the perfect food.
-
Antivax but do random shrooms/lsd/blow from strangers and buy their weed illegally
ITS ALL NATURAL!!
-
Addictions are real things in both my experience and reading - can you explain how they are not real?
Carbohydrates are not necessary for human nutrition, so there is no such thing as a carbohydrate imbalance.
Eating saturated fat does not become bad at any level of consumption.
Meat has everything we need in it, its the perfect food.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]It's a word used to demonize people doing normal human things like consuming things in excess.
Carbohydrates are a regular source of energy in food that nearly every unicellular and multicellular form of life utilizes, and are evolutionarily ancient. Everything you eat, must be processed and dealt with, and that takes vitamins. Carbohydrates need to be balanced with other nutrients like all nutrients.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9841/
All cells use adenosine 5′-triphosphate (ATP) as their source of metabolic energy to drive the synthesis of cell constituents and carry out other energy-requiring activities, such as movement (e.g., muscle contraction). The mechanisms used by cells for the generation of ATP are thought to have evolved in three stages, corresponding to the evolution of glycolysis, photosynthesis, and oxidative metabolism (Figure 1.5). The development of these metabolic pathways changed Earth's atmosphere, thereby altering the course of further evolution.
In the initially anaerobic atmosphere of Earth, the first energy-generating reactions presumably involved the breakdown of organic molecules in the absence of oxygen. These reactions are likely to have been a form of present-day glycolysis—the anaerobic breakdown of glucose to lactic acid, with the net energy gain of two molecules of ATP.
Fats need to be balanced.
"Meat" - no, not all meat is the same meat. It's regularly an issue with people feeding their pets a raw diet - they only use muscle meat and no organ meat and the pet becomes malnourished.
Are you eating thyroid? Thymus? Liver? Heart? Testicles? Ovaries? Brains? These all have different nutrients and hormones in them and we still make medicine today from some of these parts.
Meat does not have enough vitamin e or vitamin k unless you eat liver, but it also has vitamin a and each liver can have varying amounts of what vitamins are stored in it. Vitamin C is also lacking in an all meat diet devoid of organ meats.
I know weightlifters who are in their 60s regularly macrodosing vitamin e and vitamin c for this reason and they've won competitions in their younger years and had very few serious injuries compared to others. I'm gunna say these vitamins are necessary and your "meat" argument is lacking.
-
Pre pandemic i know one real life antivaxxer. Vut even then, kinda not really, he did vaccinate his kids, but he didn't like that he was forced too for school. Some real "don't tell me what to do, because i was gonna do it anyway" energy. To me antivaxxers were just the butt of online jokes.
Post pandemic, i could name so many antivaxxers, it's insane. And they all have the dumbest takes imaginable. And they always try to convince you, but i never thought for a second that this person might be onto something. The last guy who talked to me about it was a friend of my dad. I know him for a ling time, but not well at all. He said that the pandemic was all planned, but not enough people died, so they have another one coming, and that's why he's not getting vaccinated. Wait, the government tries to kill people, it didn't work as well as they thought, but they also try to vaccinate people so they don't die? Why do they try to kill people?
And his aswer was basically: "many people believe that." Motherfucker, i know you, you hang out with 5 people who are 60 to 70 years old and they are all reclusive alcoholics. It doesn't really matter what they believe.Most of the people I know who went antivax during covid are very specifically antivax about the covid vax only. They are afraid of the mRNA tech, they think it's going to modify their genes or some BS. It really is political BS though. During the pandemic, the right wing decided to make this an issue, and they stick with it.
-
Found it. It was older than I thought, though: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08165-7
To be honest, reading thru the study and poking at some of the discussions about it online, it seems to not be remotely saying what people are saying it’s saying lol.
Like they weren’t able to find many of the results they expected in actual human samples compared to the mice. They also found that slower weight loss seemed to correspond with fewer and less severe epigenetic changes.
That second point there was never really expanded on beyond a throwaway statement, but it jumped out at me because the humans studied received bariatric surgery. Which causes massive weight loss very quickly. They even cited that as a potential confounding variable.
It’s also not really about “fat cells multiplying” at all, but rather how a collection of dozens of different factors differ between never obese and formerly obese samples, and only at the two year mark after a weight loss intervention.
Their own conclusion is that “they have not proven” their findings have anything to do with weight regain. This is then bizarrely and immediately followed by what can only be described as an unprompted advertisement for Ozempic, along with speculative musing that further study is needed to determine if it could be used to “erase or diminish” the epigenetic memory (despite semaglutide being unrelated to the experiments and appearing nowhere else in the paper?). Interestingly enough, there’s also an extant conflict of interest statement linking one of the researches to several pharmaceutical companies, including Novo Nordisk
All in all, it strikes me as nothing more than yet another case of bad science reporting. With people kind of going in with preconceived notions, glossing over all of the details, and emerging with snippets taken out of context (body remembers being fat! It changes your genetics!). Lo and behold all the online discussion centers around just the provocative headline and the speculative sections of the paper.
It seems like the researches even deliberately tried to use language to bait this type of response from the general public (although this is now just speculation on my part). In summary, I am unpersuaded by the available evidence. Thank you however for linking it! There is a lot of other interesting info in there
-
It's a word used to demonize people doing normal human things like consuming things in excess.
Carbohydrates are a regular source of energy in food that nearly every unicellular and multicellular form of life utilizes, and are evolutionarily ancient. Everything you eat, must be processed and dealt with, and that takes vitamins. Carbohydrates need to be balanced with other nutrients like all nutrients.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9841/
All cells use adenosine 5′-triphosphate (ATP) as their source of metabolic energy to drive the synthesis of cell constituents and carry out other energy-requiring activities, such as movement (e.g., muscle contraction). The mechanisms used by cells for the generation of ATP are thought to have evolved in three stages, corresponding to the evolution of glycolysis, photosynthesis, and oxidative metabolism (Figure 1.5). The development of these metabolic pathways changed Earth's atmosphere, thereby altering the course of further evolution.
In the initially anaerobic atmosphere of Earth, the first energy-generating reactions presumably involved the breakdown of organic molecules in the absence of oxygen. These reactions are likely to have been a form of present-day glycolysis—the anaerobic breakdown of glucose to lactic acid, with the net energy gain of two molecules of ATP.
Fats need to be balanced.
"Meat" - no, not all meat is the same meat. It's regularly an issue with people feeding their pets a raw diet - they only use muscle meat and no organ meat and the pet becomes malnourished.
Are you eating thyroid? Thymus? Liver? Heart? Testicles? Ovaries? Brains? These all have different nutrients and hormones in them and we still make medicine today from some of these parts.
Meat does not have enough vitamin e or vitamin k unless you eat liver, but it also has vitamin a and each liver can have varying amounts of what vitamins are stored in it. Vitamin C is also lacking in an all meat diet devoid of organ meats.
I know weightlifters who are in their 60s regularly macrodosing vitamin e and vitamin c for this reason and they've won competitions in their younger years and had very few serious injuries compared to others. I'm gunna say these vitamins are necessary and your "meat" argument is lacking.
normal human things like consuming things in excess.
Excess and normal are contradicting each other in this sentence.
Yes cellular metabolism can use glucose, but that glucose in humans does not need to be eaten in the form of carbohydrates, the body is perfectly able to make its own glucose via gluconeogenesis
Fats need to be balanced.
What does this mean?
Vitamin C is also lacking in an all meat diet devoid of organ meats.
Vitamin C is in meat in small amounts, but if one is eating only meat then there is not glut4 competition and that vitamin c is very effective.
-
Wait, what?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The majority of emerging infectious diseases have a zoonotic origin, and factory farms are basically ideal breeding grounds for pandemics.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2025/06/13/factory-farms-and-the-next-pandemic/
