How and why carbs and a high carb intake will keep you fat!!
Replies
-
Ya know, we can't all spend large amounts of our time becomming experts at every field. i personally have to keep up with Telecommunications and Networking. My users count on my knowing what I am talking about so they can concentrate on their jobs. It's not different here, I don't want to go to college and study nutrician and biology and statistics and chemistry for 12 years just so I can decide what I should be eating. Therefore I have to depend on the people who have put in the time to learn this stuff. So I have to research the best I can and throw my hat in with the expert who seems to know what they are talking about.
Is that so wrong?
Not at all. Let's be honest: most of us aren't nutritionists. However, I think one thing that is quite clear to anyone with a diligent interest in their health, thanks to the availability of research on the internet and the recent run of dietary fads and revolutions, is that far too many of the recommendations and nutritional aphorisms which we grew up with are plainly WRONG.
The food pyramid is one "well-known" example. The scare about fats (esp. from eggs) is another. Lesser known is that the total caloric expenditure in digesting foods is the same whether you have 1 large meal or 6 smaller meals.
Given all that, I think it's very fair to question what the "experts" are saying. Doubly so because anyone with access to a computer and a webpage or blog can post their opinions and pass it off as research... even though many of these webpages and blogs are simply parroting the same recommendations over and over again even when they have been proven to be without scientific and evidentiary support.
So yes: ultimately you have to throw your hat in with an "expert", or a school of thought. But it shouldn't be a personal affront if someone questions the conclusions/studies of your expert.0 -
I didn't say I believed anyone because they have a MD or a BS after their name, YOU quoted Aragons credentials “with a MA” is if it matters, I simply offered you a higher certificate to worship.
I cannot believe that you aren't purposely trolling this forum.
(1) You quote selectively without context, as Aragon's MA is only introduced in this thread in response to a poster saying that he would rather listen to someone with a degree than an anonymous internet poster.
Statement: "I'd rather listen to someone with a degree than someone anonymous on the internet."
Response: "Aragon has a degree."
You then quote that as if the response is appealing to authority rather than directly responding to a question about Aragon's credentials. No one is saying you SHOULD listen to Aragon because he has a degree. The only context was IF you can only trust someone with a degree then Aragon has one. It's fair game as long as you can "catch" someone and make them look bad. The accuracy and truth of your quotes is apparently meaningless to you.
(2) When you are unable to support your claims with published studies you resort to name-calling and condescending sarcasm instead of actually addressing any of the criticisms of your position. See, for your example, your "null hippopotamus statement" and -- just a few posts above -- your post about Aragon/McGuff.
Exactly what are you trying to accomplish here?Logical Fallacy, that there is an Awfully big word professor, maybe you should explain it to us children when you use those big words.
Oops sorry Teemo, that was probably condensation again.
And again.
Name calling who did I call a name, really I don’t remember doing it, in fact I’m normally very careful to never actually call anyone a name, but I’m human and might have slipped, please point it out and I will apologize.
And since you two educated professors can’t seem to follow, here is my point, IF we are not appealing to authority, his statement should have read something along the lines of; Mr Aragon has published many original studies, studies I have read and can find no fault with, This is where I get my information, and why I trust him. He did not, he drought up his degree, I brought up another respected, degreed person, that I willing to bet has also published studies, and was told the degrees don’t matter that I was appealing to Local Fogherty.0 -
You are unreal. Teemo already laid it out - I only brought credentials into it when someone else did to show how that argument is lacking.Side step it all you like, you are still the one posting here. NO ONE here is posting Original research, we ALL are going by what others have done, and reported. Your dog isn’t any meaner than mine, everyone I have quoted is also well respected, obviously not by you, but that does little to diminish their work, in fact it does NOTHING to diminish it.
Not posting original research? http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/269934-how-and-why-carbs-and-a-high-carb-intake-will-keep-you-fat?page=9 - I cite 3 studies in that page. Have at it. I referenced this for you last page, too, when you asked. Did you forget already?
You did this work, wow, sorry I thought you just posted stuff other people did. Oh, wait do I need to spalin original to you,,,, I don't do I?0 -
And since you two educated professors can’t seem to follow, here is my point, IF we are not appealing to authority, his statement should have read something along the lines of; Mr Aragon has published many original studies, studies I have read and can find no fault with, This is where I get my information, and why I trust him. He did not, he drought up his degree, I brought up another respected, degreed person, that I willing to bet has also published studies, and was told the degrees don’t matter that I was appealing to Local Fogherty.
I already responded to that but I might as well do so again: he brought up Aragon's degree because he was asked (indirectly) whether anything he was saying or quoting was from someone with a degree. That's not an appeal to authority. THIS would be an appeal to authority:
Question: "Why should I trust Aragon?"
Response: "You should trust him because he has a degree."
THIS is NOT an appeal to authority:
Question: "Why should I trust you (or Aragon) over someone with a degree?"
Response: "Actually, Aragon has a degree."0 -
It’s all I can do to stay under my calorie limit..I can’t imagine trying to juggle carbs/protein and etc!0
-
And since you two educated professors can’t seem to follow, here is my point, IF we are not appealing to authority, his statement should have read something along the lines of; Mr Aragon has published many original studies, studies I have read and can find no fault with, This is where I get my information, and why I trust him. He did not, he drought up his degree, I brought up another respected, degreed person, that I willing to bet has also published studies, and was told the degrees don’t matter that I was appealing to Local Fogherty.
I already responded to that but I might as well do so again: he brought up Aragon's degree because he was asked (indirectly) whether anything he was saying or quoting was from someone with a degree. That's not an appeal to authority. THIS would be an appeal to authority:
Question: "Why should I trust Aragon?"
Response: "You should trust him because he has a degree."
THIS is NOT an appeal to authority:
Question: "Why should I trust you (or Aragon) over someone with a degree?"
Response: "Actually, Aragon has a degree."
But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.0 -
Lol...I wasn't trying to through credentials around like they mattered. I can care less about what conventional doctors have to say about anything. I've only made a statement saying that I like what Doug Mcguff and Radhia Gleis taught me about metabolism. When I came across Radhia's 3 part vid on carbs...i now know how they are metabolized and now know that I will stick to veggies instead of grains for my carb consumption. It works for me. Ketosis every now and then does too :happy:
I am sedentary except for normal daily household activities.
I've worked out to P90X last year before i've switched to the paleo diet. I've followed the nutrition guide to the T with the 500 cal deficit. I was always hungry and could'nt drop my body fat by my much at all.
I've given P90X another try, this time with my paleo diet and I went from 180 - 154. in 3 months. I am still sedentary and don't do much at all.
I was just shocked to actually find a doctor and nutritionist that thought outside the box...very rare.0 -
I already responded to that but I might as well do so again: he brought up Aragon's degree because he was asked (indirectly) whether anything he was saying or quoting was from someone with a degree. That's not an appeal to authority. THIS would be an appeal to authority:
this is what was wrote, they were not talking about Aragon, they were talking about untz. Untz brought up appealing to authority, and how you should base EVERYTHING on the research. Again, for him to accuse me of it, he needs to be consistent, and not do it himself, he should have said, Yes I’m just some guy, but I’m going off of this research, research done by this guy, then maybe added he is also a certified nutritionist. Consistency, man consistency.I watched her videos and can't believe you would trust a certified clinical nutricianist over some anonymous guy on the internet.0 -
I know right? Why not start there, I much rather go up to a Doctor and ask them "hey doc it hurts when I do this" than I would some stranger on the street. But I have to agree with nutz, just because they are a Doctor doesn't mean they're not going to say, "hey stupid stop doing that"
But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.0 -
But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.
That's why it's a logical fallacy. It's fallacy when you argue that a statement is correct on the basis of the credientials/authoirty who stated it.
Less so is saying that a person's judgment or opinion should be given weight because of his position/credentials. Certainly being a doctor should be given weight if a doctor tells you that, say, eggs are bad. But saying that eggs are bad because a doctor told you so is where the fallacy lies.
In light of what we now know about nutrition, the fallacy should be obvious. Doctors across the world told you eggs were bad 20 years ago. Eating eggs would lead to a heart attack, they said. And they were DOCTORS.I know right? Why not start there, I much rather go up to a Doctor and ask them "hey doc it hurts when I do this" than I would some stranger on the street. But I have to agree with nutz, just because they are a Doctor doesn't mean they're not going to say, "hey stupid stop doing that"
And if the doctor told you it was because you were pregnant? You would believe him, because he's a doctor, right? And a doctor couldn't possibly be wrong about anything medically-related?0 -
Because it's justifying someone's argument based on their credentials rather than the "truthiness" or logic of the argument itself.But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.
And guess what? It gets books out the door.
Wait, wait.this is what was wrote, they were not talking about Aragon, they were talking about untz. Untz brought up appealing to authority, and how you should base EVERYTHING on the research. Again, for him to accuse me of it, he needs to be consistent, and not do it himself, he should have said, Yes I’m just some guy, but I’m going off of this research, research done by this guy, then maybe added he is also a certified nutritionist. Consistency, man consistency.
Are you saying that citing research is an appeal to authority...?
Game, set, match.And if the doctor told you it was because you were pregnant? You would believe him, because he's a doctor, right? And a doctor couldn't possibly be wrong about anything medically-related?0 -
But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.
That's why it's a logical fallacy. It's fallacy when you argue that a statement is correct on the basis of the credientials/authoirty who stated it.
Less so is saying that a person's judgment or opinion should be given weight because of his position/credentials. Certainly being a doctor should be given weight if a doctor tells you that, say, eggs are bad. But saying that eggs are bad because a doctor told you so is where the fallacy lies.
In light of what we now know about nutrition, the fallacy should be obvious. Doctors across the world told you eggs were bad 20 years ago. Eating eggs would lead to a heart attack, they said. And they were DOCTORS.I know right? Why not start there, I much rather go up to a Doctor and ask them "hey doc it hurts when I do this" than I would some stranger on the street. But I have to agree with nutz, just because they are a Doctor doesn't mean they're not going to say, "hey stupid stop doing that"
And if the doctor told you it was because you were pregnant? You would believe him, because he's a doctor, right? And a doctor couldn't possibly be wrong about anything medically-related?
Really? You guys are too much, I agree with you and you still agrue with me, LOL, I love it.0 -
Because it's justifying someone's argument based on their credentials rather than the "truthiness" or logic of the argument itself.But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.
And guess what? It gets books out the door.
Wait, wait.this is what was wrote, they were not talking about Aragon, they were talking about untz. Untz brought up appealing to authority, and how you should base EVERYTHING on the research. Again, for him to accuse me of it, he needs to be consistent, and not do it himself, he should have said, Yes I’m just some guy, but I’m going off of this research, research done by this guy, then maybe added he is also a certified nutritionist. Consistency, man consistency.
Are you saying that citing research is an appeal to authority...?
No, who needs to learn how to read?
Did you ever figure out that "original" statement? Just asking, becasue it seems your reading ability today isn't up to par.0 -
Alright Teemo, I asked you to produce the evidence I called anyone a name, are you still looking, trying to ignore my request, or have you realized you lied about me? If the latter I do expect an apology. Again, if I did call someone a name, please point it out to me so I can apologize to them. I guess I should qualify that, I want empirical evidence I called someone a name that has been involved in this thread.0
-
Alright Teemo, I asked you to produce the evidence I called anyone a name, are you still looking, trying to ignore my request, or have you realized you lied about me? If the latter I do expect an apology. Again, if I did call someone a name, please point it out to me so I can apologize to them. I guess I should qualify that, I want empirical evidence I called someone a name that has been involved in this thread.
I didn't realize that you asked me to produce evidence that you called someone a name. So I suppose, of the three choices you presented, I would have been ignoring your request.
Regardless, it was in reference to your post sarcastically referring to Aragon as another poster's hero, and how a higher degree should therefore give them a "chubby", as well as some other possible insults that I didn't quite follow. It was, more or less, substituting your personal attack on a poster in place of an argument.
Anything else I can do for you while I'm here?0 -
Alright Teemo, I asked you to produce the evidence I called anyone a name, are you still looking, trying to ignore my request, or have you realized you lied about me? If the latter I do expect an apology. Again, if I did call someone a name, please point it out to me so I can apologize to them. I guess I should qualify that, I want empirical evidence I called someone a name that has been involved in this thread.
I didn't realize that you asked me to produce evidence that you called someone a name. So I suppose, of the three choices you presented, I would have been ignoring your request.
Regardless, it was in reference to your post sarcastically referring to Aragon as another poster's hero, and how a higher degree should therefore give them a "chubby", as well as some other possible insults that I didn't quite follow. It was, more or less, substituting your personal attack on a poster in place of an argument.
Anything else I can do for you while I'm here?
Actually that dog won’t hunt, you said this
you separated the two, condescending remarks from name calling. Now Teemo, be a man, and admit you lied about me. I did not call anyone a name. An intelligent person like yourself surely doesn’t need to have name calling splained to them do you?you resort to name-calling and condescending sarcasm0 -
Alright Teemo, I asked you to produce the evidence I called anyone a name, are you still looking, trying to ignore my request, or have you realized you lied about me? If the latter I do expect an apology. Again, if I did call someone a name, please point it out to me so I can apologize to them. I guess I should qualify that, I want empirical evidence I called someone a name that has been involved in this thread.
I didn't realize that you asked me to produce evidence that you called someone a name. So I suppose, of the three choices you presented, I would have been ignoring your request.
Regardless, it was in reference to your post sarcastically referring to Aragon as another poster's hero, and how a higher degree should therefore give them a "chubby", as well as some other possible insults that I didn't quite follow. It was, more or less, substituting your personal attack on a poster in place of an argument.
Anything else I can do for you while I'm here?
And that is a rich one, personal attack, again, you seem to be short sighted when it comes to what I do v what your buddy does.0 -
I mean this with all due respect...And that is a rich one, personal attack, again, you seem to be short sighted when it comes to what I do v what your buddy does.
0 -
I mean this with all due respect...And that is a rich one, personal attack, again, you seem to be short sighted when it comes to what I do v what your buddy does.
I'm guessing this is funny, it doesn't show up for me. HAhahahaha.
I'll be sure to check it when I get home, I love a good funny.0 -
Actually that dog won’t hunt, you said this
you separated the two, condescending remarks from name calling. Now Teemo, be a man, and admit you lied about me. I did not call anyone a name. An intelligent person like yourself surely doesn’t need to have name calling splained to them do you?you resort to name-calling and condescending sarcasm
*double post*0 -
Actually that dog won’t hunt, you said this
you separated the two, condescending remarks from name calling. Now Teemo, be a man, and admit you lied about me. I did not call anyone a name. An intelligent person like yourself surely doesn’t need to have name calling splained to them do you?you resort to name-calling and condescending sarcasm
Perhaps someone here DOES need name calling explained to them.
http://www.propagandacritic.com/articles/ct.wg.name.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_calling
http://www.johntreed.com/debate.html
http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html
Also, "and" is usually used to join terms/ideas together, not separate them. If you wanted to interpret what I said in that context, both the "name-calling" and your being condescending are both tied to your sarcasm. Yes, I am also now being condescending.0 -
But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.
Three words: The Spanish Inquisition0 -
I mean this with all due respect...And that is a rich one, personal attack, again, you seem to be short sighted when it comes to what I do v what your buddy does.
I BELIEVE THIS APPLIES TO EVERYONE. :flowerforyou:0 -
I mean this with all due respect...And that is a rich one, personal attack, again, you seem to be short sighted when it comes to what I do v what your buddy does.
I BELIEVE THIS APPLIES TO EVERYONE. :flowerforyou:
This post is so meta.0 -
But why is an appeal to authority so wrong? It seems like a logical way to go about things really.
Three words: The Spanish Inquisition
I'm just saying if I need help with something or advice I will go to the person with the most education and experience in that subject.0 -
It's a good rule of thumb, but it's not a form of argument when trying to argue a conflicting perspective.I'm just saying if I need help with something or advice I will go to the person with the most education and experience in that subject.0 -
I'm just saying if I need help with something or advice I will go to the person with the most education and experience in that subject.
Right. But just because they have a piece of paper on their wall does not mean that either of those things are true. Again, how many general practitioners do you see who disagree with the lipid hypothesis?0 -
I'm just saying if I need help with something or advice I will go to the person with the most education and experience in that subject.
Right. But just because they have a piece of paper on their wall does not mean that either of those things are true. Again, how many general practitioners do you see who disagree with the lipid hypothesis?
I agree, but it is at the very least a good place to start.0 -
Actually that dog won’t hunt, you said this
you separated the two, condescending remarks from name calling. Now Teemo, be a man, and admit you lied about me. I did not call anyone a name. An intelligent person like yourself surely doesn’t need to have name calling splained to them do you?you resort to name-calling and condescending sarcasm
Perhaps someone here DOES need name calling explained to them.
http://www.propagandacritic.com/articles/ct.wg.name.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_calling
http://www.johntreed.com/debate.html
http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html
Also, "and" is usually used to join terms/ideas together, not separate them. If you wanted to interpret what I said in that context, both the "name-calling" and your being condescending are both tied to your sarcasm. Yes, I am also now being condescending.
SO what you're saying is you're not man enough to apologize when you are wrong, I can live with that.0 -
I mean this with all due respect...And that is a rich one, personal attack, again, you seem to be short sighted when it comes to what I do v what your buddy does.
I'm guessing this is funny, it doesn't show up for me. HAhahahaha.
I'll be sure to check it when I get home, I love a good funny.
What a let down, I thought this was going to be funny.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 423 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions