post_below's recent activity
-
Comment on ‘Deny, denounce, delay’: the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods in ~food
-
Comment on ‘Deny, denounce, delay’: the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods in ~food
post_below Link ParentWell, for example, whole grain flour versus white flour. In the case of the latter much of the fiber and nutrition has been stripped, leaving a more concentrated and higher glycemic carbohydrate....seemingly less evidence that it's the processing that's bad
Well, for example, whole grain flour versus white flour. In the case of the latter much of the fiber and nutrition has been stripped, leaving a more concentrated and higher glycemic carbohydrate. That's the processing bit.
Same goes for sugar cane versus table sugar, or fruit versus isolated fructose. The processing is definitely making it worse.
-
Comment on ‘Deny, denounce, delay’: the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods in ~food
post_below LinkThe latest battle in a long war. For example, during the 90's the processed food industry famously responded to growing evidence that refined sugar was a major contributor to obesity by running a...The latest battle in a long war. For example, during the 90's the processed food industry famously responded to growing evidence that refined sugar was a major contributor to obesity by running a multifaceted and wildly successful campaign to demonize fat as an alternative culprit. Thereby changing the eating habits of a generation.
This is (another) industry that is very good at fighting regulation and science and manipulating public perception in order to maintain their profits.
-
Comment on ‘Deny, denounce, delay’: the battle over the risk of ultra-processed foods in ~food
post_below (edited )Link ParentI believe it would not, though that doesn't make homemade food using highly processed white flour healthy It's true that "ultra processed" is a broad category, and imperfectly defined. But some...But I'm pretty sure it would also count out most homemade pizza dough and banana bread if strictly applied.
I believe it would not, though that doesn't make homemade food using highly processed white flour healthy
It's true that "ultra processed" is a broad category, and imperfectly defined. But some umbrella term needs to exist for the public health nightmare that is industrialized food.
The science showing the negative health impacts of components of ultra processed food (refined sugar, refined flour, modified oils, modified proteins and so on) is copious and undisputed. It's not quite on the level of the industry manufactured climate change "debate", but it's not far off. There are no serious scientists saying that these things aren't (very) bad for people. And the impact is bigger than individual health, it's extremely expensive for public health systems.
Your post seems to be calling conclusions into question that are based on good science. Do you have anything to support that?
-
Comment on How 3M covered up "forever chemicals" in ~enviro
post_below Link ParentYou're probably right, but as long as major outlets keep reporting on it, more and more people will start to pay attention. We've been trying to avoid the worst of it for years but it's amazing...My fiance and I are always reconsidering purchases based on plastic content, but I doubt most others do to the same extent
You're probably right, but as long as major outlets keep reporting on it, more and more people will start to pay attention.
We've been trying to avoid the worst of it for years but it's amazing how extensively sketchy stuff is used.
Incomplete list of things where you'll find PFAs and BPA, starting with the most obvious:
- Cookware
- Most plastics
- Synthetic rubber/silicone
- Virtually every kind of paper and cardboard used in food packaging. If it touches the food it's sprayed with a thin layer of plastic containing PFAs and/or BPA
- Most furniture
- Water resistant clothes
- Canned food cans
- Soft drink cans
- Some paper products, including toilet paper!
- Many types of bathroom products including shampoo
- Contact lenses
- Food. This stuff is everywhere now. A lot of it ends up in the ocean, making fish are one of the worst offenders. Dairy is another food that often has high concentrations.
- Water. PFAs are in many water supplies and most don't test for or mitigate them.
Key thing to bear in mind: It builds up in the body and no one has any idea what's going to happen as people accumulate more. We're pretty sure it will be bad.
Sorry if I'm stressing anyone out. The way I look at it is that you can't avoid it completely so just minimize it as much as you can and leave it at that.
Aside from voting with our wallets or commiting Tyler Durden-esque violence—throwing Molotov cocktails into 3M factories and offices; what can we do?
You're right that that there isn't a lot individuals can do, short of devoting their lives to politics or activism. That and being conscious about what they buy. However there is one easy thing: support progressive politicians. The Biden administration isn't perfect, and an 80 year old president isn't ideal, but the president really isn't the person who matters. It's the people the admistration installs in key positions. There has been more regulation of large corporations, and strengthening of evironmental oversight, under this adminstration than there has been during any presidency for decades.
-
Comment on How 3M covered up "forever chemicals" in ~enviro
post_below Link ParentI'm with you there. It's not just 3M, or Bayer/Monsanto, or big oil, or Intuit, or the Sacklers, or the military industrial complex and so on... It's happening across all industries where there...I do not get how this isn’t on everyone’s minds, all the time.
I'm with you there. It's not just 3M, or Bayer/Monsanto, or big oil, or Intuit, or the Sacklers, or the military industrial complex and so on... It's happening across all industries where there are large profits to be found and it's happening all the time.
It's not hard to understand why people aren't focusing on it though, it's a dauntingly hard to solve problem. These companies don't just have endless funds for lawyers and PR, they have decades of regulatory capture and revolving doors with Washington. The only thing that can control them is government, and they have government in their pocket. Especially in the US.
I think people would rather believe the world is a different sort of place than it is, and I genuinely can't blame them. It's going to get increasingly harder to ignore though, as climate change ramps up and the global health effects of PFAs (and so much more) start impacting ever increasing numbers of people directly.
-
Comment on Fecal microbiota transplant: Inside the black market for human poop in ~health
post_below Link ParentThanks for the context, agreed that this sort of thing should be called out. There are so many, and a high concentration in the world of alternative health. Which is too bad because there are real...Thanks for the context, agreed that this sort of thing should be called out.
the Harrops of this world
There are so many, and a high concentration in the world of alternative health.
Which is too bad because there are real solutions to be found for people who can't get help elsewhere. Many based on solid science that just hasn't had the decade plus it often takes to filter into mainstream medicine. Well much less if you have pharma cash to push it through. You don't even necessarily need good science then.
I'd locate FMT for things other than C-Diff well outside the realm of solid science for now.
I believe people have every right to try it in spite of that but it's absolutely the job if the regulatory agencies to make sure that the Harrops aren't the ones giving it to them.
-
Comment on Fecal microbiota transplant: Inside the black market for human poop in ~health
post_below Link ParentWell... 30 plus or minusWell... 30 plus or minus
-
Comment on Fecal microbiota transplant: Inside the black market for human poop in ~health
post_below Link ParentBe sure to wait until there's more research and practical experience. A fecal transplant can do as much harm as good, depending on the source and your own biology.Be sure to wait until there's more research and practical experience. A fecal transplant can do as much harm as good, depending on the source and your own biology.
-
Comment on The lonely work of moderating Hacker News in ~tech
post_below Link ParentThat's my experience as well. On the whole it's more rational and constructive than the internet average. It's far from perfect, there are a frustrating (but not overwhelming) amount of ego driven...That's my experience as well. On the whole it's more rational and constructive than the internet average.
It's far from perfect, there are a frustrating (but not overwhelming) amount of ego driven posts and a small but noticeable demographic of people looking for intellectual dunks, which I chalk up to the high percentage of young(ish) male tech bros. That makes it less welcoming than many places but it also keeps the noise level down, HN is merciless to posts that don't add value.
One point in HN's favor is that in any thread about a specific tech, science or engineering topic, there's a really good chance of genuine domain expert posters, and a good chance those posts will be heavily upvoted.
-
Comment on Cryptocurrency mining as a novel virtual energy storage system in islanded and grid-connected microgrids in ~enviro
post_below Link ParentThat's exactly what it is. I'll give them one thing, marketing through the publishing of "scientific" papers is crafty. I hate to see the heading of "science" becoming increasingly cynical.That's exactly what it is. I'll give them one thing, marketing through the publishing of "scientific" papers is crafty.
I hate to see the heading of "science" becoming increasingly cynical.
-
Comment on Cryptocurrency mining as a novel virtual energy storage system in islanded and grid-connected microgrids in ~enviro
post_below LinkCrypto as "virtual energy storage" is an onion article. I won't repeat all the reasons why since we did a thread like this not long ago.Crypto as "virtual energy storage" is an onion article. I won't repeat all the reasons why since we did a thread like this not long ago.
-
Comment on What is a value or belief you have that is extremely outside the norm? in ~talk
post_below Link ParentI'm not sure chemically castrating children should be among our options.I'm not sure chemically castrating children should be among our options.
-
Comment on What is a value or belief you have that is extremely outside the norm? in ~talk
post_below Link ParentRelated to this: no one wants to talk about the topic. It's completely understandable, it's disturbing, hard to understand and no one wants to risk being associated with something so universally...Related to this: no one wants to talk about the topic. It's completely understandable, it's disturbing, hard to understand and no one wants to risk being associated with something so universally loathed.
But it's also one of the biggest problems in society and it appears to have been that way for all of human history. I think it's fair to say that the damage sexual abuse does is on the same level as murder. It's maybe worse as the cycle of abuse can echo for generations.
I imagine everyone has a sense of the statistics, that they're under reported but that about 20% of girls are sexually abused. There's no easy way to quantify how big an impact that has on society, but it's clearly a huge problem.
But what do we actually do about it? That it's illegal doesn't seem to have much impact. We have (under used) support systems for victims and... not much else? No doubt there are resources I'm unaware of but it seems like we could do a lot more. Not only in terms of counseling and mental health but also research. I don't think we understand the problem as well as we should given its prevalence.
As you say, potential offenders need help, but risk ruining their lives if they look for it. Difficult as it may be, I think we should have more compassion for victims of abuse that have had their wiring scrambled. If there was space for anything other than unequivocal condemnation we might be able to figure out how to make sure that less victims become abusers themselves.
One of the reasons I've given the topic some thought is that I briefly knew a man who told me that he had unwanted thoughts about his daughter. That he was willing to say that out loud at all was shocking. He said he'd gone to multiple therapists who told him that there was nothing wrong with him. At the time he was in the process of moving across the country to get away from the situation. I imagine there were a lot of details he didn't share and I didn't ask.
I later heard that he went to prison for abusing his daughter.
So here was someone who knew they had a problem and genuinely wanted to get help before it was too late. What if he had actually been able to get that help? If we actually understood the problem well enough to help him?
I think a part of making that happen is being able to have conversations (on a cultural level) about the issue that aren't only about prohibition and punishment.
-
Comment on Should moderation be more transparent? in ~tildes
post_below LinkThe idea of a moderation log has merit. That said, in my experience it's really easy for meta conversations about moderation to use an increasing amount of bandwidth and thereby shift the vibe in...The idea of a moderation log has merit.
That said, in my experience it's really easy for meta conversations about moderation to use an increasing amount of bandwidth and thereby shift the vibe in the wrong direction.
People start to get precious about comments or threads or users that they were attached to. They carry their disagreements forward into other threads. They start to feel like they need to crusade for what's "right". In short they start to feel like what's happening (or not happening) on the forum is far more important than it actually is... and it goes south from there.
Of course I have no idea if that would happen on Tildes, only that I've seen it happen before more than once.
Personally I'm quite content with everyone (me included) not knowing the details about moderation. Tildes is a nice place to hang out on the internet, it's hard to imagine moderation politics making it better.
If a thread or a comment I like disappears and it bothers me, it's a reminder not to take the site too seriously.
-
Comment on Musi’s free music streaming app is a hit with thrifty teens. The app claims to tap content on YouTube, but some in the music industry question the legitimacy of that model. in ~music
post_below Link ParentIt's an indication that people are fed up enough to migrate in large numbers, markets usually respond to that.It's an indication that people are fed up enough to migrate in large numbers, markets usually respond to that.
-
Comment on Musi’s free music streaming app is a hit with thrifty teens. The app claims to tap content on YouTube, but some in the music industry question the legitimacy of that model. in ~music
post_below Link ParentI don't think this needs to be polarized between the extremes of "you're obligated to watch the ads that make the service free so you don't ruin it for everyone else" and "it's my right to do what...I don't think this needs to be polarized between the extremes of "you're obligated to watch the ads that make the service free so you don't ruin it for everyone else" and "it's my right to do what I want with my devices".
Both things are true of course, but I think between the poles there is this: enshittification causes people to look for alternatives. Which is good.
Bypassing compensation for content is bad for everyone if the scale gets big enough. But a few big players sucking up most of the compensation and increasingly screwing everyone else involved to keep the line going up as they near the limits of available growth is also bad for everyone but them.
Musi, and other alternative clients, are gonna get killed by the big guys, but they provide an unintentional service by showing us that the marketplace wants new options. Hopefully more sustainable options will fill the demand.
information wants to be free
Information doesn't want anything. People want information to be free.
Isn't the idea behind "information wants to be free" that it's hard to control and therefore its tendency is to disseminate? Rather than being a literal description?
-
Comment on Macklemore - Hind's Hall (2024) in ~music
post_below Link ParentI know it's a rhetorical question but: Because the Biden camp is anxious about the young vote. If they think changing course on Gaza is necessary politically, then maybe. Probably it would be a...I know it's a rhetorical question but: Because the Biden camp is anxious about the young vote.
If they think changing course on Gaza is necessary politically, then maybe. Probably it would be a token change, but that's better than nothing.
The actual act of voting for anyone but Biden is objectively worse for Gaza (Trump will support Israel) but votes are the only leverage most people have.
I disagree with the strategy but the logic is sound.
-
Comment on Google lays off hundreds of ‘Core’ employees, moves some positions to India and Mexico in ~tech
post_below Link ParentWhy wouldn't we blame capitalism for the failures of government when government is so clearly controlled (to a significant degree) by capital? Lawmakers aren't failing because they're earnestly...Why wouldn't we blame capitalism for the failures of government when government is so clearly controlled (to a significant degree) by capital?
Lawmakers aren't failing because they're earnestly trying and in their incompetence they just can't make it work. They're failing because they're part of a system that, over time, has become an apparatus to serve capital. It won't let them control it.
That said it's not binary, lawmakers haven't completely lost their ability to reign in companies, as the current administration has shown. It's also shown, though, that there are some industries you don't touch, and on the whole the money keeps getting sucked to the top, where it can further influence lawmakers.
I'm ok with not labeling capitalism as the core problem. It's the best economic system we have. We could blame the founders for failing to create a system less susceptible to capture. Or we could blame any number of people along the way who could have pushed for changes before it was too late.
But either way, when you have free markets and you don't regulate them aggressively enough, this is what you eventually get.
IMO it's important to be clear about the problem if you hope to fix it.
-
Comment on AI, automation, and inequality — how do we reach utopia? in ~talk
post_below Link ParentYou're right, or at least that seems like the most likely outcome as things stand now. Things like AI and automation making better standards of living possible for the masses isn't on the horizon,...You're right, or at least that seems like the most likely outcome as things stand now.
Things like AI and automation making better standards of living possible for the masses isn't on the horizon, it's already in progress, automation has been creating (relative) surplus for a very long time.
Every major technological advance from farming and the wheel to the industrial revolution has increased the baseline standard of living. And in every case the majority of the surplus went to the top. The same has been true so far of the digital revolution.
The biggest difference now is that the big players in the economy have gotten better at capturing the surplus created by advances before it can benefit the majority of the population.
The answer, though, isn't to give in to the seemingly inevitable dytopia this implies. Some western countries have succeeded, through government, in carving out a larger part of pie for the general population (single payer, education, childcare, etc..). It's not on the level of UBI but it's evidence that it's possible in the modern world.
There's some missing context I think. There are a lot of reasons why it's useful to have a simple way to refer to the issue.
A big part of the problem is the food industry itself. They have been working for a long time to get people addicted to cheap, unhealthy food by co-opting well documented biological processes. Having done that, they fight to keep the most addictive ingredients available.
Or in other words, they are actively lobbying against any attempt to make their food healthier that would impact sales. They're also paying firms to help them modify public opinion, and they're really good at it.
So it's a hard problem. The kind politicians don't want to spend political capital on and regulators are pressured to avoid. But politicians and regulators are more likely to care if they think voters care, so public awareness is important.
And you're not going to foster a public conversation by trying to educate the public about 20 different ways processed food is bad for you. No one has the bandwidth for that and a lot of people really don't want to change the way they eat.
Instead you need a simple umbrella term under which you can have an ongoing conversation about the problem with a lot of participants.
Ultra processed seems like fine term to me. Sure you can argue semantics, but why?