Living The Lifestyle Thursday 1/16/25
imastar2
Posts: 6,346 Member
Hey everyone! I saved this in my draft yesterday and then had to get out it and ran out of time. So here is LTL Thursday.
This is a thread for everyone. If you're new to GoaD, or to weight loss, your questions and comments are always welcome. If you're maintaining, or a long-term loser, your thoughts on the topic may be just what someone else needs to hear. If you're reading this, join in the discussion!
Each weekday, a new topic is offered up for discussion.
Monday - crewahl (Charlie)
Tuesday – Wildcard
Wednesday-misterhub (Greg)
Thursday -imastar2 (Derrick)
Friday - Wildcard
Today's Topic: I'd like to continue the Red Dye #3 discussion but expand on it and see if anyone would like to comment. I posted this YouTube video in the red dye #3 thread. It's about 5 minutes long and I found it very interesting and believable. Politics aside which we never discuss here on GoaD this video is somewhat disturbing for today's food consumption/consumers.
This YouTube appeared about 3 months ago from RFK Jr. I found it to be eye opening.
https://youtu.be/0_OjKe4BuDE?si=ND0tVQDAsq1hz2O0
This is a thread for everyone. If you're new to GoaD, or to weight loss, your questions and comments are always welcome. If you're maintaining, or a long-term loser, your thoughts on the topic may be just what someone else needs to hear. If you're reading this, join in the discussion!
Each weekday, a new topic is offered up for discussion.
Monday - crewahl (Charlie)
Tuesday – Wildcard
Wednesday-misterhub (Greg)
Thursday -imastar2 (Derrick)
Friday - Wildcard
Today's Topic: I'd like to continue the Red Dye #3 discussion but expand on it and see if anyone would like to comment. I posted this YouTube video in the red dye #3 thread. It's about 5 minutes long and I found it very interesting and believable. Politics aside which we never discuss here on GoaD this video is somewhat disturbing for today's food consumption/consumers.
This YouTube appeared about 3 months ago from RFK Jr. I found it to be eye opening.
https://youtu.be/0_OjKe4BuDE?si=ND0tVQDAsq1hz2O00
Replies
-
I've now seen this video about 3 times but due to being pretty busy I've just finding it hard to police every label but DW and I have been concentrating for quite sometime on no GMO ingredients. Then they changed that to bioengineered ingredients. So if it does have bioengineered products on the label we just put it back on the shelves and move on.
Example: we both wanted some egg nog during the holidays leading up to Christmas. We went to 3 different supermarkets and yes you guessed it bioengineered were in all the labels.
We/I decided to make some homemade egg nog but unfortunately we just moved on to other things and never made any. I really didn't need to drink it anyway because I'm sure irs loaded with calories.
I cut out diet caffeine drinks way back there but somehow I re researched the ingredients in the diet drinks of all kinds and the studies are in on those drinks, that they actually make you more hungry because of the reactions your body has to the sweetners.
So we'll keep plodding along and just eat as we can and stick to as much natural and or organic as we can. That doesn't even seem to be totally safe anymore either.
Just thought it would make for a good discussion.0 -
OMG... I love love love what RFK is preaching. LOVE. @imastar2 Thank you for posting!
yes - the chemicals in the food are *Eye opening* to say the least. What is the phrase I've heard. Something like "if you eat just a little of it, it doesn't kill you....so we added it to your food." Like what the H*E**L**.
I try to stick to as much natural foods as I can but, I do enjoy Turkey peperoni ... which isn't good for me. I enjoy snicker candy bars now and again. And, OReos... ITs all about environment and what you let in. If I were living in a remote tribe in africa, I would be okay * I hope* with the natural foods. (I don't know if i could eat crickets and mice or whatever though, hope I don't have to find out. ).
What I find extremely hard is that hubby likes to go to fast foods for supper now and again and, Its hard to say "no I don't want to go out". I try to just get a salad with chicken. Or chicken strips. Rarely have fries. A soda from time to time. I do enjoy the energy drinks.
1 -
I’m not going to wander into politics, but I will say I’m not prepared to invest five minutes of my life in this gentlemen's opinions.5
-
I only follow the opinions of credible food scientists. Not trying to create a ruckus on a sedate board, but just sayin’3
-
Personally, I think having a greater focus on preventative health is long-since overdue. Many insurance companies have already recognized the value on preventing disease--many of us, for example, had financial incentives from our insurance companies to do biometric testing, to get in more steps, to join gym and fitness clubs, and even to join WW. It made financial sense to avoid disease.
However, there hasn't been that much of a financial incentive at a policy level to push for population-level preventative health. Having our government focus even a bit more on preventative health is a smart move.
But (and this is a big BUT), it does need to be data driven. Unfortunately, high-quality population-level data on preventative health initiatives are really hard to come by. As an example, simply calling something a "poison" doesn't make it so, and extrapolating small lab-based studies into the human population is fraught with difficulties.
I don't have a great answer for this. Removing unnecessary chemicals seems reasonable, but just where that line is drawn and what the unintended effects are (e.g., more expensive food when they aren't as well-preserved on the shelf, or if kids stop eating "healthier" food because it doesn't look or taste as good) will dictate the overall effectiveness of the effort.2 -
Follow the evidence-based science, not misinformation or disinformation that is so prevalent nowadays2
-
Flintwinch wrote: »Follow the evidence-based science, not misinformation or disinformation that is so prevalent nowadays
Everyone loves "evidence-based science," but the definition of evidence-based, misinformation, or disinformation may (at least at times) be more subjective than objective. Plus, what do you do if there is no evidence-based science to answer a question?1 -
Flintwinch wrote: »I only follow the opinions of credible food scientists. Not trying to create a ruckus on a sedate board, but just sayin’
Just to drive home my point (that you gotta be careful about data-driven science), remember the story of Brian Wansink? He was probably the most well-known of the "credible food scientists," and yet, he was apparently publishing all sorts of invalid work: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/09/26/651849441/cornell-food-researchers-downfall-raises-larger-questions-for-science1 -
steve0mania wrote: »Flintwinch wrote: »I only follow the opinions of credible food scientists. Not trying to create a ruckus on a sedate board, but just sayin’
Just to drive home my point (that you gotta be careful about data-driven science), remember the story of Brian Wansink? He was probably the most well-known of the "credible food scientists," and yet, he was apparently publishing all sorts of invalid work: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/09/26/651849441/cornell-food-researchers-downfall-raises-larger-questions-for-science
The scientific method is not at fault here, but his “ baggy pants” science is. That is the nub of the problem with pseudoscience that won’t stand up to rigorous analysis.1 -
Ditto crewahl.1
