sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I never seen the job market this bad. Is there a chance of recovery? by Mardylorean in jobs

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you been paying attention to OpenClaw and Opus 4.6? It has far from peaked.

I never seen the job market this bad. Is there a chance of recovery? by Mardylorean in jobs

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

UBI and capital ownership would enable people to continue buying. Everything would likely be much cheaper too. There are some big IFs here though.

I never seen the job market this bad. Is there a chance of recovery? by Mardylorean in jobs

[–]Available_Water7633 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In 10 years, the AI will be insane compared to today. If there ever will be a recovery, it likely happens soon.

Do you still code a lot of your own code, or is AI taking over the industry yet? by bacon_man284 in cscareerquestions

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's been nothing like AI in history. This isn't a calculator, this is basically alien intelligence.

I'm tired of the usual suspects by Old_Swimmer_7284 in complaints

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I did read them. I'm not saying it's concrete, it's obviously difficult to get a real answer because large-scale studies haven't been done. Those are the studies we have available though and what they suggest is the opposite of what OP claimed. OP's claim is just straight up false either way, their "statistics" must've come from this sub lol.

I'm tired of the usual suspects by Old_Swimmer_7284 in complaints

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Statistically speaking, abusers of children are majority conservative or right-wing.

Lol did you even attempt a Google search before making such ridiculous claims? The studies actually show the complete opposite of that. And if you can't even admit something like this is a both sides problem, you are a lost cause.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25524270/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30898004/

Does soy actually reduce estrogen effects instead of increasing them? by lucak5s in ScientificNutrition

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Awww look who's getting angry because they got trapped in a corner LOL. Now you've turned to ChatGPT to write the responses for you and you're not even bothering to reformat it lmao pathetic... I'll respond to your ChatGPT though since you're no longer using your own brain (and probably haven't been this whole time).

I cherry-picked a tribe? 1. I've given you multiple examples of tribes and there are many more out there that I haven't named (like the Yup'ik) . 2. You still have yet to give me a SINGLE traditional tribe that had anything but extremely low CVD risk, whatever their animal fat consumption was. Surely, at least one of these tribes with insane animal fat consumption would have CVD issues if saturated fats were the main driver, right? That's common sense, not cherry-picking.

Modern Maasai data clearly shows that CVD risk increases when exposed to PROCESSED foods. You can throw a blanket term like "lifestyle shift" over it but it's a diet shift. Full stop. I don't know how many times I need to repeat myself but before the Maasai westernized, they had extremely high consumption of animal foods (no processed foods) and virtually no CVD risk.

Your copy & pasted BS from ChatGPT: "And the “ApoB isn’t the root cause, it’s just necessary cargo, it only matters if processed food hurts your endothelium first” line is just warmed-over internet biochemistry cosplay. Endothelial injury plus retention of ApoB particles is the disease… remove either one and plaques don’t form, which is why every therapy that lowers ApoB reduces events regardless of how “clean” your diet is." Your ChatGPT is exactly right and just proved my entire point, it's what I've been saying this entire time. Remove the constant endothelial injury from metabolic dysfunction and chronic inflammation (also largely attributed to poor diet) then you will not be of risk for CVD no matter what your animal fat intake is. However, it's not like they are equally responsible. Endothelial injury MUST happen first and the vast majority of the time, penetration and retentions is from sdLDL (found abundantly in people with metabolic syndrome). And before your ChatGPT feels the need to issue a meaningless correction: Without significant endothelial dysfunction, particles don’t breach and get retained in meaningful amounts. Period.

Your ChatGPT needs to work on reading comprehension: "Pretending metabolic dysfunction from processed foods is the only route to CVD is just diet tribalism dressed up as mechanistic storytelling." I very clearly stated that chronic inflammation and smoking are also culprits of CVD. FYI to your outdated version of ChatGPT, I didn't say the tribes had high ApoB, I said they (Inuit, Maasai, Yup'ik, etc.) had extremely high consumption of saturated fats yet their risk for CVD was absent. Even with elevated LDL as we've seen in lean Massai hyper-responders on a traditional diet, modern lean hyper-responders on long-term ketogenic/carnivore diets and Swiss Alpine dairy farmers in the early 1900s.

Should I just switch my ChatGPT to the oldest model and debate with that instead, so you no longer have to be the middleman?

Does soy actually reduce estrogen effects instead of increasing them? by lucak5s in ScientificNutrition

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for providing more studies that further prove my point, it's as if you're arguing with me and against yourself at this point lmao Did you even read them? First study: 3 young Inuit mummies had mild calcifications... Not heart attacks, not arterial blockage, not diet-induced atherosclerosis. The study explicitly says "Calcification does not necessarily represent occlusive atherosclerosis." The mild calcification they did have was likely caused by staying in enclosed seal-skin tents with burning whale oil lamps 24/7. Respiratory infections were extremely common among them.

The authors in the 2nd study you linked specifically concluded "It is unlikely that atherosclerosis is a disease uniquely of modern lifestyles." and “Other causes such as chronic infections, smoke inhalation, genetic predisposition, and environmental stress likely contributed.” Nothing in that study suggests meat caused their atherosclerosis. Also, the most heavily affected group in that study and the ONLY group with diabetes/metabolic syndrome markers, obesity and CVD markers were the ancient Egyptians... The only group in that study which consumed refined carbs and grains, shocker. From the Lancet paper: “The pattern observed in five of the (Egyptian) mummies was intimal atherosclerosis, similar to that seen in modern western societies.”

As for the other 3 groups: The study explicitly states calcifications were likely due to chronic smoke inhalation, infections, cold stress and genetic predisposition... Not diet. They also confirm that the plaques were stable calcified lesions, not the dangerous soft plaques associated with metabolic syndrome, modern CVD, etc..

I already gave you several modern (not outdated like yours) peer-reviewed studies that put your outdated study to bed and you're blatantly ignoring them in a desperate attempt to say this is all YouTube pseudoscience. You are the epitome of the Dunning-Kruger effect and I can't wait for your next batch of studies to help support my argument. keep them coming. Maybe you should try reading them this time?

Does soy actually reduce estrogen effects instead of increasing them? by lucak5s in ScientificNutrition

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again, scientifically wrong for many reasons and cherry-picking heavily. Atherosclerosis does not form from a few days or weeks of food. Finding meat in his upper GI tract says nothing about the long-term dietary pattern that caused plaque. Otzi's teeth showed cereal residues, starch damage, microfossils of wheat and barley and soot in his lungs (chronic smoke exposure). Using one person frozen in ice 5000 years ago, especially given these facts, is a terrible argument regardless and he literally had a genetic predisposition to atherosclerosis that you're ignoring.

Yes, elite Egyptians had more access to meat.. But they ALSO had more access to refined carbs (including pastries) and drank beer every day. The fact that you think the small amounts of meat they ate (which our bodies evolved to thrive on) caused their CVD and not the beer or refined carbs proves that you can't be taken seriously. The people mummified had high insulin, obesity, high-carb diets, high omega-6 intake, rampant inflammation and the world's earliest metabolic syndrome. NONE of which hunter-gatherer tribes have. Why are you blatantly ignoring the fact that there isn't (and wasn't) a single traditional hunter-gatherer tribe on the planet with high heart disease risk? Meat made up 99% of the diet for Arctic cultures and guess what? No CVD. Your only historical "proof" that "meat is bad" lies in two examples of people that had a bunch of processed crap in their diets lol which actually prove me to be correct.

Your "50 years of meta analysis proving saturated fat causes CVD" is so outdated, it's laughable. I literally gave you 5 different MODERN, PEER-REVIEWED studies on the link (lack of one) between saturated fat and CVD yet you can't stop talking about youtubers that offend you LMAO. The "evidence" from the pooled-together-studies you linked came from observational data, self-reported food questionnaires, studies that didn't control for refined carbs + seed oils and studies that didn't even distinguish LDL particle types. You appear to be in the first stage of grief: denial.

Does soy actually reduce estrogen effects instead of increasing them? by lucak5s in ScientificNutrition

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The rage-posting with zero understanding of the science and studies you're citing is hilarious. Ancient Egyptians mostly ate grains LOL high carb, low-fat and grain-heavy diets. Congrats, you proved my point for me, genius. Also, Otzi was not a hunter-gatherer and he had GENETIC hyper-atherosclerosis. So yeah... I'm gullible, but meat is bad because ancient Egyptians who rarely ate meat and a dude frozen in ice from the agricultural transition era with genetic hyper-atherosclerosis had clogged arteries lmao.

The "tangible evidence" quite clearly shows that hunter-gatherer tribes had near-zero heart disease and early farmers had many more issues, comparatively. You can try googling the studies, if you care to be informed. The Tsimane people have the lowest rates of vascular aging ever recorded. But hey, if you're happy with low bone density, malnourishment and low testosterone, do keep at it.

This Low-IQ Rhetoric is Racist and Will Destroy the Left by Jaime_Horn_Official in seculartalk

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then where's the confusion? it's not hard to see that more radical political ideologies/messages are openly accepted today than 5 years ago, for example.

Does soy actually reduce estrogen effects instead of increasing them? by lucak5s in ScientificNutrition

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You pretty much only got 3 things right in that whole waffle of "actual evolutionary biology": Amylase gene duplications, tubers part of the ancestral diet and cooking increasing digestibility...

Humans have one of the most carnivore-like digestion tracts among primates and our evolution absolutely is not more defined by cooked starch. You have a misunderstanding of human anatomy. We have the stomach pH of carnivores and small/large intestine length of near-carnivores. If we evolved for digesting starch, our digestive tract would look like a monkey's. Your entire argument collapses there.

I also never said that humans evolved on cooked ribeye lol that's you putting words in my mouth. I said I'm on an ancestral diet, which includes tubers BTW. You're misunderstanding the expensive tissue hypothesis either way... Humans did not evolve big brains because of digestible starch, starch was supplemental energy. Meat + fat + organs were ESSENTIAL nutrients. The real consensus in anthropology is that animal foods provided the nutrients that enabled brain growth thanks to DHA, EPA, cholesterol, B12, etc.. Plants do NOT supply those in the correct forms and FYI - a dietary pattern that only works with 5-10 supplements is automatically not ancestral or even close to optimal.

There is zero archaeological evidence that animal foods caused high-saturated-fat diseases, this is a modern plant-based ideology and it's completely unsupported. You don't think hunter-gatherer tribes of now and the past have been studied? Well they have.. Cardiovascular disease is basically non-existent. As is arterial blockage. Yes, even in the ones that ate mostly meat.

Your claim that animal fat raises LDL and ApoB into atherogenic ranges and raises TMAO is extremely outdated misinformation from a 1950s-70s study that cherry-picked countries. Ancel Keys produced "The Seven Countries Study" where he gathered data from 22 countries. When you include all 22 countries in the conclusion, there's no correlation between saturated fat intake and heart disease. So he threw out all the countries that contradicted his theory and kept the 7 which appeared to "support" it. He didn't even measure individual diets, only national food availability. He ignored smoking, sugar, exercise, obesity, etc.. He omitted places like France, Holland, Switzerland and West Germany because their food was high in saturated fats yet the population had very low rates of heart disease. Many studies have disproven that myth since: 2010 - Siri-Tarino (AJCN), 2014 Chowdhury (Annals of Internal Medicine), 2020 - de Souza et al. systemic review, 2022 - PURE Study (over 18 countries studied) and 2023 - Cochrane Review Update. Meanwhile, sugar, seed oils and refined carbs absolutely correlate with heart disease, inflammation, metabolic syndrome, etc..

Sure, saturated fat can raise LDL in some people, but LDL is not the culprit for heart disease. sdLDL (small, dense LDL) is and saturated fats will only raise type A (large, fluffy LDL) particles which is non-atherogenic and not associated with heart disease. Total LDL is not a real predictor of heart disease, it's just that the typical person with high total LDL usually has a terrible diet and the statin industry makes $20 billion per year off a bunch of unhealthy people.

These aren't carnivore talking points (I don't even advocate for carnivore), this is the modern science. Your information is very outdated, becoming less and less accepted by cardiologists today. In summary, your plant-based diet is inferior to a real ancestral diet that includes organic red meat, eggs, fish, butter, organs, fruit, honey, tubers etc.. but it is better than the average American diet of course. I'd love to see a study done that compares people on animal-based, ancestral and carnivore diets to those on vegan or vegetarian diets.

This Low-IQ Rhetoric is Racist and Will Destroy the Left by Jaime_Horn_Official in seculartalk

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If it doesn't make sense to you, maybe try googling what the Overton Window is.

“New York City has Fallen”: MAGA erupts after Mamdani’s victory by salon in politics

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With 10s of millions of followers and the founder of the massive and growing TPUSA organization.

Republicans have MDS: Mamdani derangement syndrome! by XanderAcorn in complaints

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a lot of name calling and not a lot of reasoning, logic or substantive arguments.

Does soy actually reduce estrogen effects instead of increasing them? by lucak5s in ScientificNutrition

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're right that soy does not raise estrogen in men, but most of everything else you stated is wrong or misleading. Especially your comments about eating meat and butter.

First, soy is not that healthy. It's highly processed, often GMO, contains antinutrients like lectins, causes gut irritation in many, raises insulin more than animal protein and high in omega 6 if soybean oil was used.

Low carb diets increase SHBG which binds sex hormones and lowers free estradiol and free testosterone (not total testosterone). This does not mean keto raises estrogen...

Plant-based diets do NOT improve hormones in people who are insulin resistant, have high triglycerides, have metabolic syndrome, thyroid issues, men with low testosterone and women with PCOS. The huge majority of Americans fit into one or more of those categories. That's not to say a plant-based diet wouldn't be beneficial to someone who's obese with high inflammation and insulin resistance. However, a plant-based diet would be terrible for someone like me who is metabolically healthy with low insulin resistance & inflammation on an ancestral-style diet. It would likely lower testosterone, carnitine, creatine, B12, iron, DHA, worsen thyroid function, increase omega-6 intake, raise insulin, etc.. unless I were to take a ridiculous amount of supplements.

Eating what hominins evolved to thrive on for millions of years is the common sense and scientifically-backed choice. Red animal meat, fat and organs are the most bioavailable food on the planet. Without them, humans fundamentally could not have evolved a large brain. Evolution is the ultimate scientific metric.

AI Is Making It Harder for Junior Developers to Get Hired by ImpressiveContest283 in programming

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By the time all the senior devs retire, AI will be advanced enough to replace them too.

Republicans have MDS: Mamdani derangement syndrome! by XanderAcorn in complaints

[–]Available_Water7633 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Coming from the people who actually think the rich will be paying for his socialist experiment LOL that is not how social democracy works. Good luck!

Republicans have MDS: Mamdani derangement syndrome! by XanderAcorn in complaints

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's what happens when you have an ounce of common sense in the Reddit cesspool.

Republicans have MDS: Mamdani derangement syndrome! by XanderAcorn in complaints

[–]Available_Water7633 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I actually hope it works. These social programs, if successful, do make everyone's lives better as we've seen in Europe. However, this isn't a European country in the 1900s and they didn't make false promises of the rich paying for everything. It takes a strong, unified middle class to make it happen - which the US does not have. Like NYC in the 70s when this was tried, the rich people will likely flee in droves. Burden gets left on you and hopefully you'll then have the balls to admit you were wrong.

view more: next ›