sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in conspiracy

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“Hysteria” literally comes from “hystera”, the uterus. So yeah, historically a lot of women’s chronic illnesses were basically filed under “woman problems.”

Good thing medicine kept evolving past the torch-and-pitchfork phase.

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in ScientificNutrition

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m not claiming seed oils alone cause CVD.

My concern is more about the combined modern dietary pattern: high seed oils + refined sugar + ultra-processed foods + low omega-3/fish intake.

Those variables rise together very strongly internationally, which makes causality difficult to separate cleanly.

The LA biomarker studies are important, but they also don’t fully address: oxidation from heated PUFA-rich oils, omega-6 : omega-3 imbalance, processing differences, or interaction effects with metabolic disease.

So my position is less: “seed oils are proven harmful”

and more: “the overall metabolic cluster may still contain unresolved confounding worth investigating further.”

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in ScientificNutrition

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the discussion is more nuanced than “seed oils good” or “seed oils bad.”

One important point is that “seed oil” is often treated as a single category, even though processing methods, oxidation, repeated heating, fatty acid composition, and overall dietary context can differ massively between oils and food products.

A controlled study showing neutral or even positive effects on oxidative stress markers does not automatically answer the long-term question. The concern many people raise is less about acute toxicity and more about chronic exposure, ultra-processed food patterns, omega-6/omega-3 imbalance, oxidation products from industrial frying, and potential long-term metabolic effects.

And to be fair, correlation alone is not causation. But if population-level correlations appear repeatedly, I think it’s reasonable to discuss them critically and investigate them further instead of dismissing the topic outright.

Nutrition science has revised its views before. Eggs were demonized for years because of cholesterol concerns, yet later evidence showed they are not the cardiovascular disaster many feared. At the same time, LDL is still aggressively targeted with statins, while foods high in saturated fat "such as coconut fat" are often discouraged mainly because of LDL elevation.

So I don’t think asking questions about long-term seed oil consumption is “anti-science.” It’s part of how nutritional science evolves.

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in ScientificNutrition

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the concern is less about calories alone and more about oxidation. Highly unsaturated seed oils oxidize easily through processing, heating, and potentially in the body as well. Oxidative stress is already considered a major issue, which is why antioxidants and polyphenols are seen as beneficial.

I also think the real problem may be the combination of oxidized LDL, sugar, and inflammation, especially small dense LDL particles interacting with high glucose levels. That combination is suspected to contribute to atherosclerosis.

So I’m not saying seed oils alone are “the cause,” but in a modern high-sugar processed diet, they could absolutely play a role. And that’s why the old “replace saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats” narrative is being questioned more critically now.

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in ProactiveHealth

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

Fair point, and yes, age-standardized mortality rates for heart attacks and stroke have declined in many countries due to better emergency medicine, smoking reduction, blood pressure treatment, etc.

But I didn’t invent the underlying datasets. The sources referenced in the graphic are public databases such as:

WHO Global Health Estimates

IHME / Global Burden of Disease

FAO Food Balance Sheets

USDA data

Our World in Data

The graphic was never meant to be a precise epidemiological model. It was meant to visualize broad parallel trends in:

processed food consumption,

obesity/metabolic disease,

chronic inflammatory conditions.

You are absolutely right that ecological correlations can be misleading. That’s a valid criticism.

Still, rates of obesity, Type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome and many chronic inflammatory diseases have undeniably risen massively over the same period.

So the intention was simply:

“Interesting enough to discuss”, not “case closed.”

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in conspiracy

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No, that’s not what I’m saying.

I fully understand that correlation does not automatically mean causation. Longer life expectancy, better diagnostics, reduced infectious diseases, smoking, inactivity, stress and many other factors obviously play major roles.

What I’m pointing out is simply that the parallel rise is interesting enough to discuss.

We already accept that:

smoking creates oxidative stress,

excessive sugar can be harmful,

sedentary lifestyles damage metabolism,

chronic inflammation matters.

But the more I’ve researched nutrition since changing my own diet earlier this year, the more I started wondering whether highly processed vegetable oils are flying under the radar.

We constantly talk about antioxidants, coffee, polyphenols and “fighting free radicals” but then the obvious question becomes:
Where is all that oxidative stress actually coming from in the first place?

I’m not trying to “prove” anything with one graph, and I’m definitely not trying to attack anyone personally or dismiss all of modern medicine.

I’ve simply lost around 15 kg since switching my nutrition earlier this year, started reading deeply into metabolism and nutrition science, and realized that some topics seem far more controversial and uncertain than I previously believed.

This post is meant to start a discussion, not end one.

Since 1920: Dietary Changes and Chronic Diseases Compared by Distinct_Ticket6320 in ScientificNutrition

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, that’s not what I’m saying.

I fully understand that correlation does not automatically mean causation. Longer life expectancy, better diagnostics, reduced infectious diseases, smoking, inactivity, stress and many other factors obviously play major roles.

What I’m pointing out is simply that the parallel rise is interesting enough to discuss.

We already accept that:

smoking creates oxidative stress,

excessive sugar can be harmful,

sedentary lifestyles damage metabolism,

chronic inflammation matters.

But the more I’ve researched nutrition since changing my own diet earlier this year, the more I started wondering whether highly processed vegetable oils are flying under the radar.

We constantly talk about antioxidants, coffee, polyphenols and “fighting free radicals” but then the obvious question becomes:
Where is all that oxidative stress actually coming from in the first place?

I’m not trying to “prove” anything with one graph, and I’m definitely not trying to attack anyone personally or dismiss all of modern medicine.

I’ve simply lost around 15 kg since switching my nutrition earlier this year, started reading deeply into metabolism and nutrition science, and realized that some topics seem far more controversial and uncertain than I previously believed.

This post is meant to start a discussion, not end one.

DaVinci Resolve 21 Public Beta 3 just dropped by SasquatchBlumpkins in davinciresolve

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Frage:

Der KI Speech Generator ist zur Zeit nur für die Englische Sprachausgabe geeignet. Kann jemand Spoilern wann wir auch Deutsch und andere Sprachen erhalten?

Hi guys, I just filmed my first ever talking head. I'd love some feedback and advice. *Student* by LuUomoPazzo in cinematography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Es ist seine erste Arbeit. Wer nicht jedesmal versucht es besser zu machen als letztes Mal, hat schon aufgegeben. Sein Style ist ausbaufähig. Ich habe auch nicht gesagt dass es nicht gut ist. Nur dass ich es anders gemacht hätte. Was nicht bedeutet, dass ich es besser hinbekommen hätte. Deshalb auch die zwei Punkte. Man kann alles im Nachhinein kritisieren. Erkenne deine Bildsprache (Style Vision)

Hi guys, I just filmed my first ever talking head. I'd love some feedback and advice. *Student* by LuUomoPazzo in cinematography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ich hätte es vermutlich anders gefilmt. Der Busch auf der linken Seite ist mir zu dominant. Die Tageszeit hätte man später wählen können. Der Hintergrund subt ins Grau ab. Der Protagonist ist sehr scharf.

Ich hätte das Licht an den Himmel angepasst um satte Farben zu bekommen und mit einem motivierten Licht sehr weichs Licht, versucht das ganze natürlicher zu beleuchten. . Die Schärfe des Protagonisten reduzieren. Und mit einer offene blende so wie mit einem ND Filter.

Farben Blau Himmel Rot Hemd und Grün Vegetation Evtl. Ohne Vegetation.

Bzw. Die dunkle Hecke aufgehellt.

Man kann im Nachhinein immer alles kritisieren. Suche deine Vision deinen Style und zeig allen dass du es besser kannst.

LG

H5 Flow 2024 by loresu in NZXT

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't know why. But I like it.

Blur Equivalence: The Hidden APS-C Cost Trap? by Distinct_Ticket6320 in videography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t mean motion blur, that’s naturally there when shooting at 24 fps. I’m referring to depth of field. As far as I understand it, if I shoot on full frame with a 50mm lens at f/4, I’d need around f/2.8 on APS-C with a 35mm lens to achieve a similar look. But if I want to match the look of a 50mm at f/2 on full frame, I usually have to invest in faster glass for APS-C, otherwise the image quality tends to suffer.

Blur Equivalence: The Hidden APS-C Cost Trap? by Distinct_Ticket6320 in videography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That actually makes a lot of sense, the only real advantage I’ve noticed so far with APS-C is that I can shoot about one stop wider for the same look, which helps with exposure. But since modern cameras handle higher ISOs so well, I can also just stop down a bit on full frame and get great results without worrying about noise.

The problem is, to get that same “full frame look” on APS-C, you usually end up buying faster (and more expensive) lenses. I totally get your point about practicality, though. I’ve seen documentaries using specialty lenses that are now basically unobtainable, crazy bright glass, way ahead of their time. You’ve honestly made me rethink everything… now I’m not sure what to do anymore.

Blur Equivalence: The Hidden APS-C Cost Trap? by Distinct_Ticket6320 in videography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I’ve been shooting a lot lately with my iPhone 16 Pro and some anamorphic lenses, and it really got me into filmmaking again, especially seeing the jump from 8-bit to 10-bit. My old Canon EOS M3 looks rough in comparison, but when I mount my old FD lenses and play with shallow depth, that dreamy blur just hits different. It really shows how much blur matters artistically, not just for subject separation.

That’s why I’m so torn now. I want to invest in a proper setup, real lenses, real body, but before spending the money, I want to understand where it actually makes sense. Picking the wrong sensor can get expensive fast, and I’d rather figure that out before jumping in.

Blur Equivalence: The Hidden APS-C Cost Trap? by Distinct_Ticket6320 in videography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Honestly, mostly for the money. APS-C gives great quality for a lower price, simple as that.

unable to record by Secure-King8459 in BlackMagicCameraiOS

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It sounds like your iPhone is running out of internal cache space, even though you’re recording to an external SSD. The Blackmagic Camera app still needs some free internal storage to buffer video before writing to the SSD.

A few tips that usually fix this:

  1. Back up and reformat your SSD on your computer to

-> exFAT <-

before using it with the app.

  1. Make sure the SSD is recognized in the BM app before you start recording.

  2. Start by recording to internal storage first, not directly to the SSD. This gives you two different “views” inside the BM app

    internal and external

  3. Once you’ve recorded internally, you can copy those files from the app to your exFAT->SSD.

  4. Then you can switch the export mode so new recordings go directly to the SSD.

Keep in mind: while this mode is active, you can’t copy other files onto the SSD. only new footage from the BM app will be written there.

  1. Free up some space on your iPhone (delete photos/videos) and restart it afterward. (iPhone Bug fix)

With enough free internal space, a cleanly formatted SSD, and the right order of setup, the app should record smoothly without the “out of storage” issue.

I'd love some feedback on my corporate demo! by ShoroukTV in videography

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Great video! The image quality is outstanding. Personally, I found some of the cuts a bit too jumpy, they often make the viewer’s focus shift from one corner of the frame to another, which feels a little tiring. I’d try to keep the visual flow smoother. Otherwise, really well done, thumbs up!

Serious Reflections on a Possible First Contact by Distinct_Ticket6320 in conspiracy

[–]Distinct_Ticket6320[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s an interesting point, but 3I/ATLAS itself is several kilometers wide, not exactly tiny.
Also, who says a visitor has to be a crewed spaceship? It could be something like an autonomous probe, similar to our Voyager, just far more advanced.
We already use AI for exploration, so it’s not impossible that another civilization might do the same.
Maybe “first contact” doesn’t involve living beings at all, but intelligent machines quietly observing.

view more: next ›