Oh, sorry about posting a meme. When it comes to that dastardly practice I was simply emulating the best ─ @Frederick Foresight ─ who posted these 11 memes in just the last 30 days (!) here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here, and here. Again I apologize for posting the occasional meme as we all agree that's undoubtedly a lousy way to make a point or persuade anybody. And I bow to your superior approach. Because we all know SCIENCE is never wrong ─ except when it frequently is. Below are just a few examples out of thousands that are available: https://www.acsh.org/news/2020/12/3...-bogus-health-claims-acsh-debunked-2020-15247 https://aier.org/article/why-so-much-science-is-wrong-false-puffed-or-misleading/ https://www.osc.org/popular-science-myths-debunked-clearing-up-misconceptions/ https://science.howstuffworks.com/science-vs-myth/everyday-myths/10-false-science-facts.htm https://www.businessinsider.com/worst-science-health-myths-2016-1 While I respect science I also realize that reference to it is often used to promote a narrative. And when done in a condescending, pejorative fashion it doesn't tend to win any hearts 'n minds. Carry on...
My memes tend to be limited mostly to the politics forum, which, with Trump in power, is the only suitable form of communication. Regarding science, sure it often gets it wrong, but it evolves. It’s an iterative thing. So what alternative would you propose? It’s a bit like democracy in that it’s the worst possible choice except for all the alternatives. Carry on.
Offering "science" as if it's the final word and we are to trust ALL science can get a little dicey at times...
Cool cherry picking. But what's the alternative to properly conducted and peer-reviewed scientific research?
Mine was no more cherry picked than the 2 links you provided in your recent post. In public discourse I would assert that presented scientific claims are ALWAYS OPEN TO QUESTION. That includes the results, the funding behind the research, and the possible bias of the people presenting the science. Beyond that most will always drift towards the "science" that matches their own beliefs, and like both you and I will (ahem) cherry pick what reinforces our narratives.
Good points. The question is, with whom to side? I opt for the preponderance of evidence as presented and assessed by the mainstream medical community. They may not always get it right, but that's where the smart money is.
Fine, get your science from X. I note that he visibly holds in his gut. Also, I’m fairly confident that his supplements run into the exotic, if you get my meaning. I’d choose someone else to follow and emulate if health and longevity are your objectives. P.S. Magna, this is your thread. If you would rather I not clutter it with my views, I can refrain from further comment.
Nah, I welcome your comments ─ provocative, challenging, and occasionally humorous j/k Bring on all those McGill studies, and I'll counter with brilliant (but misunderstood) twitter "scientists". All in good fun, and hopefully all in good health...
my A1C went from 6.2 to 5.4 on keto and my total cholesterol improved a lot as well. it's hard to manage esp when the family is baking, etc. but it's worth it.I saw some benefits on IF but not much on weight loss. Earlier bloodwork proved it but going full keto (>40% fat/meal) did the trick. I also don't eat after 5pm so I have a good 14 hours fasting.