Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
USA vs. Europe, NY Times
Replies
-
kshama2001 wrote: »One thing I did not mention above. Wheat has three sets of genes, it managed this feat of science on its own at some stage in its natural development. I've not seen it recorded that there are any other organisms which have achieved this same feat naturally. One of the issues we humans have can with the plant, is with the protein gluten, only what they do not tell us is the genetic background of wheat inflates the number of proteins wheat contains, some of those who test negative for gluten may well react to one or more of these other proteins.
I fear the use of chemicals. I like organic foods when possible because the number of chemicals used in their production is much smaller and less damaging to us and the soil, than the dominant chemicals in general agriculture. Naturally the productivity teds to be lower from such plants which increases the unit costs. As the quality of the soils the plants are grown in improves the productivity will increase. I discovered some time ago the principal cell in our lungs which take oxygen from the atmosphere was utilised from some mould or similar, these simple structures are damaged by salicylate/paraben which pollutes our atmosphere from weed killers, household detergents, personal hygiene products, preservatives in foods and so much more. (I find all this sciency stuff incredibly interesting, I really wish more of you were even a tiny bit interested, remember, I used to be unable to go into public spaces because of others laundry residue and perfumes, take heed because I fear this could happen to a few of you)
As I have said, I am one of the outliers having dietary/health problems caused by living in this chemical Dependant world. Its true many plants which are gmo will not need the same chemicals and any ordinary agricultural crop but I believe we are playing fast and loose with our quality of life and this is causing the rise in chronic illness and autoimmune disorders, even weight gain.
BTW, smoking over here in the UK is only permitted in ones own homes not in public places, it has been so for years. There was even talk of parents being prosecuted for smoking in the car with their children present! Over here we walk on pavements and drive on roads. We have so much more to concern ourselves with than scientists finding ways to increase food crops by messing with plant structures, how about reducing the rate of abnormal weather incidents such long dry, hot summer burning up the ground then torrential rainfall washing them or large populated areas away. Pardon, this is global warming and no one believes in that on here, do they?
Stay Healthy. Happy New Year to one and all.
I developed chemical sensitivities after working in a building that turned out to have toxic mold. I am MUCH better than I was in 1999, but still cannot use my backyard when my neighbor is drying clothes with fabric softener sheets, and I can tell when she is doing laundry from surprisingly far out in the woods.
People who have not experienced sensitivities like this find it hard to believe but once they have experienced this they are changed for life.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »One thing I did not mention above. Wheat has three sets of genes, it managed this feat of science on its own at some stage in its natural development. I've not seen it recorded that there are any other organisms which have achieved this same feat naturally. One of the issues we humans have can with the plant, is with the protein gluten, only what they do not tell us is the genetic background of wheat inflates the number of proteins wheat contains, some of those who test negative for gluten may well react to one or more of these other proteins.
I fear the use of chemicals. I like organic foods when possible because the number of chemicals used in their production is much smaller and less damaging to us and the soil, than the dominant chemicals in general agriculture. Naturally the productivity teds to be lower from such plants which increases the unit costs. As the quality of the soils the plants are grown in improves the productivity will increase. I discovered some time ago the principal cell in our lungs which take oxygen from the atmosphere was utilised from some mould or similar, these simple structures are damaged by salicylate/paraben which pollutes our atmosphere from weed killers, household detergents, personal hygiene products, preservatives in foods and so much more. (I find all this sciency stuff incredibly interesting, I really wish more of you were even a tiny bit interested, remember, I used to be unable to go into public spaces because of others laundry residue and perfumes, take heed because I fear this could happen to a few of you)
As I have said, I am one of the outliers having dietary/health problems caused by living in this chemical Dependant world. Its true many plants which are gmo will not need the same chemicals and any ordinary agricultural crop but I believe we are playing fast and loose with our quality of life and this is causing the rise in chronic illness and autoimmune disorders, even weight gain.
BTW, smoking over here in the UK is only permitted in ones own homes not in public places, it has been so for years. There was even talk of parents being prosecuted for smoking in the car with their children present! Over here we walk on pavements and drive on roads. We have so much more to concern ourselves with than scientists finding ways to increase food crops by messing with plant structures, how about reducing the rate of abnormal weather incidents such long dry, hot summer burning up the ground then torrential rainfall washing them or large populated areas away. Pardon, this is global warming and no one believes in that on here, do they?
Stay Healthy. Happy New Year to one and all.
I developed chemical sensitivities after working in a building that turned out to have toxic mold. I am MUCH better than I was in 1999, but still cannot use my backyard when my neighbor is drying clothes with fabric softener sheets, and I can tell when she is doing laundry from surprisingly far out in the woods.
People who have not experienced sensitivities like this find it hard to believe but once they have experienced this they are changed for life.
I believe in unexplained allergic reactions....that isn't it.
Let's say someone suffers from some sort of unexplained allergic reaction or symptom. They respond by looking around their environment when they have the reaction and they pick something they think might be the cause. They then notice that assumed environmental trigger and shortly after have the symptom. From that they conclude that IS the cause and are confident enough to proclaim it as such to others.
To those people I'm not doubting they have debilitating reactions or symptoms, it is simply I am skeptical that one can just figure out the causative agent of something with an n of 1 and anecdotal experience.
By analogy it is like the person who claims they have seen an alien spacecraft. It is not really that I doubt that one night in the desert they saw a strange object in the sky that they could not identify....rather I am simply skeptical of the conclusion they reached that it must therefore be an alien spacecraft.6 -
n=1 100x times with the same results will clue in most people or perhaps some of us are just special.
11 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »n=1 100x times with the same results will clue in most people or perhaps some of us are just special.
n=1 refers to one person, not the number of times they experience symptoms. This sort of thing is why we have blinded scientific studies. Individuals will pattern-seek and find something....doesn't mean what they found is the cause. When I say individuals I am referring to all people incluiding myself, no one individual is a reliable source...we are all full of biases and desires to find explanations to our problems and solutions for what we want to change and we tend to find them where we look....which should tell you something.7 -
All I was saying after the same person repeats the same n=1 for 100 times and getting the same results it would normally have meaning to that one person. Do you agree?2
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »All I was saying after the same person repeats the same n=1 for 100 times and getting the same results it would normally have meaning to that one person. Do you agree?
Sure I accept that a persons belief has meaning for that person...as I said I am not questioning that persons belief, I am questioning that method as an means of establishing actual causality. If a person finds that whenever they are near clothes that have been treated by a fabric softner that they get a rash on their skin and they decide to avoid fabric softners and they stop getting the rash then it is logical for them to decide to avoid that situation to avoid the rash. The issue I take is them deciding they have shown in some objective way that they have an allergy to an ingredient within that fabric softner....they haven't. If they take it upon themselves to tell others how that ingrredient causes that rash...that isn't really a good thing. An individuals coincidental experience is not a good basis for determining the actual cause of things, never has been for anything....that is why Science is useful. But ultimately if the way the person decided that X causes Y is just by their own personal experience then really they are just going off their own assumptions and nothing more and I don't personally find that very convincing.
If I have an allergy to something I do not personally have the ability or resources necessary to by myself determine for certainty the cause of it. That is not an easy thing to do. I might find that if I avoid X I don't get the symptoms and then I can make a decision if I want to avoid X or not...but to decide that means X is for sure the cause is to basically decide that that mysterious object in the sky is for sure an alien spacecraft. Its an overreach...claiming you know something you frankly cannot really know.
5 -
In studying the placebo effect I ran into quantum mechanics so it seems we may not physically exist as I was taught many years ago. So certainty of everything just flew out the window that I was certain about a year ago.
I am now certain there is no certainty about the meaning of words.
Perhaps the placebo effect is from beyond our normal senses. I do agree with you that we can come to think our thoughts are reality when they may have never existed like many memories that we have are actually false memories that came from who knows where.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »In studying the placebo effect I ran into quantum mechanics so it seems we may not physically exist as I was taught many years ago. So certainty of everything just flew out the window that I was certain about a year ago.
I am now certain there is no certainty about the meaning of words.
Perhaps the placebo effect is from beyond our normal senses. I do agree with you that we can come to think our thoughts are reality when they may have never existed like many memories that we have are actually false memories that came from who knows where.
I can only assume you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I'm not claiming that people's belief makes things happen to them. I'm simply saying that people believe things that aren't true...no need to invoke any metaphysics for that one.3 -
I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »In studying the placebo effect I ran into quantum mechanics so it seems we may not physically exist as I was taught many years ago. So certainty of everything just flew out the window that I was certain about a year ago.
I am now certain there is no certainty about the meaning of words.
Perhaps the placebo effect is from beyond our normal senses. I do agree with you that we can come to think our thoughts are reality when they may have never existed like many memories that we have are actually false memories that came from who knows where.
You have now entered into a Deepak Chopra level of woo.
Congratulations?7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »...American packaged food comes in all kinds of forms and tastes. This is a bizarre generalization.
Actually...I would agree with this one, and I'm an American. I had a medical issue for a while where I was having bad allergic reactions but we didn't know to what. Ended up having to make all my own foods from very fresh products, couldn't even have grains or dried spices. And when I was trying foods again that were packaged - yeah, blech. I honestly thought something new had been done to the foods I tried, because there was so much bitterness or this odd chemical-aftertaste. And then finally did some research and found out that, no, it's just what we do to our packaged food. All of it.
Because while there may be variety in the actual food itself, there is a huge homogeneity in the chemicals use ON the food. Most grains, for example, have certain chemicals used on them during storage, like insecticides or anti-fungals. Most processing lines use similar soaps and cleansers, and most packages have some similar linings because it's food safe and the cheapest. Most packaged foods use one out of only a small list of preservatives or anti-bacterials/anti-fungals on them. Most foods contain a small number of ingredients that have a lot of chemicals used in processing (for example, corn starch and corn syrup both have sulfites used in their processing, during the wet corn milling).
And if you don't eat these all the time? You CAN taste these. And it absolutely is bitter or has odd taste that I can only describe as 'chemical.' Kind of like how some toilets have that blue water and it smells chemical - you couldn't say WHAT chemical, but it's noticeable, you know?
I rarely eat packaged foods. I sometimes eat oats (Bob's Red Mill, usually), I sometimes eat dried pasta (imported from Italy), I sometimes eat canned tomatoes (Italian or American, no sugar added, because that's weird), I buy dry beans and lentils, and I sometimes buy canned beans/chickpeas. I buy cottage cheese and yogurt from the farmers market more often than not (although sometimes Fage yogurt). (I buy eggs from a farm too.) I get tofu/tempeh, but it's non GMO (because I buy it at WF more than because I care).
I buy olive oil, vinegars, and spices.
Hmm. I do buy smoked salmon, and frozen fruits and veg.
Despite this, when I do have something packaged, I don't perceive bitterness or a chemical aftertaste at all. At least not with the foods I choose. (I like a lot of greens some people call bitter, so maybe I just wouldn't notice.)
This is my experience too. I don't notice bitterness in my packaged foods (mostly grains, beans, pasta, and canned foods like tomatoes). It may be there, but my taste buds aren't sensitive enough to pick it up. My husband is very quick to pick up on bitter tastes and I don't recall him ever complaining about it either (and he tends to eat more pre-made stuff like cereal and crackers).1 -
I was referring to problematic proteins like gluten. Most of the foods (wonderful foods) mentioned by jonewe05, above are generally eliminated from my diet because of their salicylate and/or histamine content, unless I live on dietary enzymes and more, must not advertise, giggle. (Salicylate is used by plants to protect themselves from moulds and mildews. In me high levels contributed to poor lung function, I discovered in one natural history programme that the very fine cells which take our oxygen from the air fall into the mould or mildew categories, which because of my high unresolved salicylate levels suffered extreme stress. Histamine has some uses in our bodies, I can't remember which, I'm working on being able to better eliminate it!) Why do our bodies have to be so complicated.2
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.
Delayed choice quantum experiments do not indicate that reality morphs to your wishes. No physicist would claim that. Placebo effects are most likely just due to the fact that stress can be debilitating or aggravate certain conditions and worrying that you have no way of treating the condition is stressful...giving someone a sugar pill can give them a false sense that they are actively engaged in fixing their problems which can relieve stress which can have some actual positive benefit. If an actual drug is only as effective as a sugar pill then any effect it has is more due to the person just thinking they are getting treated then them actually being treated...in which case it doesn't make any sense to spend the effort to produce that drug. That does not mean that if you wish yourself to be cured of an infectious disease that you will be cured and delayed choice quantum mechanical experiments don't mean that either.
You are turning something objective about reality (quantum mechanical effects) and something psychological (placebo) and turning into some sort of mystical ability to control reality with your mind....that is taking it to far.6 -
I was referring to problematic proteins like gluten. Most of the foods (wonderful foods) mentioned by jonewe05, above are generally eliminated from my diet because of their salicylate and/or histamine content, unless I live on dietary enzymes and more, must not advertise, giggle. (Salicylate is used by plants to protect themselves from moulds and mildews. In me high levels contributed to poor lung function, I discovered in one natural history programme that the very fine cells which take our oxygen from the air fall into the mould or mildew categories, which because of my high unresolved salicylate levels suffered extreme stress. Histamine has some uses in our bodies, I can't remember which, I'm working on being able to better eliminate it!) Why do our bodies have to be so complicated.
gluten is only "problematic" for people with celiac disease. Same as lactose is only "problematic" for those who are lactose intolerant and peanut oil is only "problematic" for those with peanut allergies. The rest of your post is just confusing so no comment there.
To me it sounds like you probably just have a salicylate allergy and were probably told at some point to avoid foods that contain high levels of salicylic acid in order to reduce the chance of an immunopathological inflammatory response. I assume you were also told to avoid aspirin?
Inflammatory responses and allergenic inflammation in general are controlled by cytokine networks and histamine, which is released by your own mast cells to induce an inflammatory response to deal with a percieved injury, rushing blood to the area. In the case of allergies this is pathological, or an immunopathology, where you get a type 1 hypersensitivity based on induction of this system from an allergen rather than injury resulting in uncontrolled swelling and inflammation causing potential tissue damage or obstruction of blood vessles or airways. Using drugs to block histamine receptors can help abrogate the potential deleterious effects of unwanted inflamation due to an allergic reaction. Neither salicylate or histamine are "bad". If you somehow snapped your fingers and eliminated all histamine from your body and no longer produced it the result would be that your innate immune system would no longer function which would probably result in your death...histamine isn't a bad thing. Histamine is something your body produces so there is no reason to avoid histamine in your diet...if a doctor mentioned anti-histamines to you it is a way of modifying your bodies own immune response reaction to an allergen not telling you to somehow avoid eating histamine which doesn't even make sense.
I'd advise you to not try to self-diagnose or make decisions about your medical needs on your own...consult with doctors. Also understand that if you do suffer from some sort of allergy that doesn't mean that whatever induces your allergy is "bad" or somehow something everyone should endevour to avoid.5 -
@galehawkins notorious for knowing nothing about statistics...have some internet tomatoes 🍅🍅🍅🍅🍅🍅.
For this purpose/use, GMO is perfectly fine...5 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.
Delayed choice quantum experiments do not indicate that reality morphs to your wishes. No physicist would claim that. Placebo effects are most likely just due to the fact that stress can be debilitating or aggravate certain conditions and worrying that you have no way of treating the condition is stressful...giving someone a sugar pill can give them a false sense that they are actively engaged in fixing their problems which can relieve stress which can have some actual positive benefit. If an actual drug is only as effective as a sugar pill then any effect it has is more due to the person just thinking they are getting treated then them actually being treated...in which case it doesn't make any sense to spend the effort to produce that drug. That does not mean that if you wish yourself to be cured of an infectious disease that you will be cured and delayed choice quantum mechanical experiments don't mean that either.
You are turning something objective about reality (quantum mechanical effects) and something psychological (placebo) and turning into some sort of mystical ability to control reality with your mind....that is taking it to far.Aaron_K123 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.
Delayed choice quantum experiments do not indicate that reality morphs to your wishes. No physicist would claim that. Placebo effects are most likely just due to the fact that stress can be debilitating or aggravate certain conditions and worrying that you have no way of treating the condition is stressful...giving someone a sugar pill can give them a false sense that they are actively engaged in fixing their problems which can relieve stress which can have some actual positive benefit. If an actual drug is only as effective as a sugar pill then any effect it has is more due to the person just thinking they are getting treated then them actually being treated...in which case it doesn't make any sense to spend the effort to produce that drug. That does not mean that if you wish yourself to be cured of an infectious disease that you will be cured and delayed choice quantum mechanical experiments don't mean that either.
You are turning something objective about reality (quantum mechanical effects) and something psychological (placebo) and turning into some sort of mystical ability to control reality with your mind....that is taking it to far.
Aaron are you saying placebo effects are not real results?3 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Aaron_K123 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.
Delayed choice quantum experiments do not indicate that reality morphs to your wishes. No physicist would claim that. Placebo effects are most likely just due to the fact that stress can be debilitating or aggravate certain conditions and worrying that you have no way of treating the condition is stressful...giving someone a sugar pill can give them a false sense that they are actively engaged in fixing their problems which can relieve stress which can have some actual positive benefit. If an actual drug is only as effective as a sugar pill then any effect it has is more due to the person just thinking they are getting treated then them actually being treated...in which case it doesn't make any sense to spend the effort to produce that drug. That does not mean that if you wish yourself to be cured of an infectious disease that you will be cured and delayed choice quantum mechanical experiments don't mean that either.
You are turning something objective about reality (quantum mechanical effects) and something psychological (placebo) and turning into some sort of mystical ability to control reality with your mind....that is taking it to far.Aaron_K123 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »I thought metaphysics was a branch of philosophy and it was not what I was talking about but was referring to quantum mechanics that seems to explain the existence of the placebo effect.
https://sciencemag.org/news/2017/10/quantum-experiment-space-confirms-reality-what-you-make-it-0
This would explain the view that everything that we think of as real today was thought/spoken into existence. One drug stock crashed this week when their medicine turned out to be no more effective than the placebo effect in controlled double blind clinical trials. The placebo effect does not come from a chemical so it has to come from the mind it would seem to me. You Are The Placebo by Joe Dispenza (2014) is a good book about research into what the placebo effect seems to be about that Aaron I expect you might find interesting.
Delayed choice quantum experiments do not indicate that reality morphs to your wishes. No physicist would claim that. Placebo effects are most likely just due to the fact that stress can be debilitating or aggravate certain conditions and worrying that you have no way of treating the condition is stressful...giving someone a sugar pill can give them a false sense that they are actively engaged in fixing their problems which can relieve stress which can have some actual positive benefit. If an actual drug is only as effective as a sugar pill then any effect it has is more due to the person just thinking they are getting treated then them actually being treated...in which case it doesn't make any sense to spend the effort to produce that drug. That does not mean that if you wish yourself to be cured of an infectious disease that you will be cured and delayed choice quantum mechanical experiments don't mean that either.
You are turning something objective about reality (quantum mechanical effects) and something psychological (placebo) and turning into some sort of mystical ability to control reality with your mind....that is taking it to far.
Aaron are you saying placebo effects are not real results?
No I am not saying that...not sure where you got that from. You seem to just not understand what I am saying either willfully or for whatever other reason and I'm not sure how else to say it.
If you spend 1 billion dollars on R and D to develop a drug and then spend more on production costs and the end result is a pill that has no more effect than a sugar pill then that drug is pretty much a waste of time and effort and shouldn't be used, after all why spend money producing a specific small molecule when a practically free sugar pill would do the same thing. The result you get from the placebo effect is a real result, just not a desirable one.
Placebo level effects are effects, but they are psychological and not a result of what is actually being administered. It is the bottom...the goal in drug development is to do better than that, otherwise you are wasting time and money.4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions