Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 100

Thread: Gluconeogenesis page 9

  1. #81
    pklopp's Avatar
    pklopp is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    531
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Ah, but that begs to question.... is placebo (state of mind, belief, meditation, positive thinking....whatever) simply the strongest medicine with no side effects!

    You know I wonder if there as been any experiments aimed specifically at enhancing the placebo effect? Like a single blind trial with three arms placebo, placebo + doctor "letting it slip" that you are in the group getting the drug, and drug groups. Could be interesting to see how much we can maximize the placebo effect.
    These experiments have been done. I will see about digging up some references for you. I also believe that Ben Goldacre has an entire chapter on this in his book, Bad Science. Placebo pill color matters, for instance, with I believe dark, somber colors like red having more of an effect than blue, for instance.

    Placebo injections work better than placebo pills, irrespective of color. The more pomp and circumstance associated with a placebo the more effective the placebo, which goes a long way towards explaining how a voodoo priest / witch doctor can kill people merely by sticking a pin in a doll.

    -PK
    My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

    Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

  2. #82
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,202
    It took you 2 weeks to come up with that?

    I already knew everything you said, the only thing you managed to do is take a little post of mine and turn it into a copy and paste from google scholar fest(I checked), and cherry picked parts to post against.

    It's not mantra, when you compare the huge amount of carbons, then consider you have to separate the hydrogens from the carbon atoms, break the oxygen molecule apart, then recombine all those atoms to make co2 and h2o. It takes hundreds of small reaction steps. But, whatever you say...

    Since you ignored it the first time, I said fatty acids, degraded, not fats, again: before fatty acids can be oxidized, they must first undergo a priming step. Fatty acids in the cytoplasm must cross the mitachondria membrane before the oxidation begins; this was the point I was eluding to. The overall initiating step is the reaction of the fatty acid with coenzyme A. This reaction requires energy and is therefore coupled with the hydrolysis of ATP to AMP. The activated long chain fatty acid is carried across the mitochondria membrane by carnitine. And this is a very shortened version after the fact.

    It should be obvious why fat oxidizes slower. Of course, it's mantra to you, but you haven't proven otherwise, you just showed the steps of beta oxidation repeatedly(gee thanks)

    Because I was being generous and decided to give you the benefit of the doubt, as long chain fatty acids were in my last post which quote you removed. The whole part about cleaved fatty acid uncoupling, and mitochrondria dysfunction, induced membrane "leakiness", and shortened ATP production, ergo, co2, by wasting it, via many ways, which is what this whole argument was about.

    That last part :eyeroll:

    Your reading comprehension sucks. The rest of this crap isn't worth responding to, because I have no idea what you're trying to say, because half that shit is just presumptuous. Are you schizophrenic perhaps?
    nihil

  3. #83
    jackaaron's Avatar
    jackaaron is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    US
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    It took you 2 weeks to come up with that?

    I already knew everything you said, the only thing you managed to do is take a little post of mine and turn it into a copy and paste from google scholar fest(I checked), and cherry picked parts to post against.

    It's not mantra, when you compare the huge amount of carbons, then consider you have to separate the hydrogens from the carbon atoms, break the oxygen molecule apart, then recombine all those atoms to make co2 and h2o. It takes hundreds of small reaction steps. But, whatever you say...

    Since you ignored it the first time, I said fatty acids, degraded, not fats, again: before fatty acids can be oxidized, they must first undergo a priming step. Fatty acids in the cytoplasm must cross the mitachondria membrane before the oxidation begins; this was the point I was eluding to. The overall initiating step is the reaction of the fatty acid with coenzyme A. This reaction requires energy and is therefore coupled with the hydrolysis of ATP to AMP. The activated long chain fatty acid is carried across the mitochondria membrane by carnitine. And this is a very shortened version after the fact.

    It should be obvious why fat oxidizes slower. Of course, it's mantra to you, but you haven't proven otherwise, you just showed the steps of beta oxidation repeatedly(gee thanks)

    Because I was being generous and decided to give you the benefit of the doubt, as long chain fatty acids were in my last post which quote you removed. The whole part about cleaved fatty acid uncoupling, and mitochrondria dysfunction, induced membrane "leakiness", and shortened ATP production, ergo, co2, by wasting it, via many ways, which is what this whole argument was about.

    That last part :eyeroll:

    Your reading comprehension sucks. The rest of this crap isn't worth responding to, because I have no idea what you're trying to say, because half that shit is just presumptuous. Are you schizophrenic perhaps?
    Regarding the bolded part, I'm really curious how you did this.

    My assumption is that you put in a few search terms (I'm sure you can remember), and found specific articles. Could you link those?

    I'm also assuming that when you say (I checked) you really did, that's why I'd like further information.

  4. #84
    pklopp's Avatar
    pklopp is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    Elided Effluvium Excerpted below
    Good morning, Derpie!

    You are labouring under a misconception, namely that in a public forum such as this you are actually speaking to me, when in fact, you are not. You are in fact speaking to a much larger audience that will judge you on the merits of what you say and how you say it. With that in mind, one sure way to lose ground is to resort to insulting me personally, so, for example, calling me schizophrenic. This tactic is useless, as I do not care about your opinion of me, because in order for that to matter, I would have to hold you in some esteem, and I do not. So you cannot score points with me, and as regards the larger forum base, either I am schizophrenic, at which point you look cruel, or I'm not, which makes you look petty and juvenile.

    The way to actually sway someone to your point of view is with specific rebuttals of things that your opponent has said. As an example, when I say that there are hundreds of reaction steps involved in fatty acid oxidation, you would point out that beta oxidation only involves 3 additional steps relative to pyruvate. At the end of one cycle of the four reactions of beta oxidation, you have one molecule of acetyl CoA, and a fatty acid that has been shortened by two carbons. The acetyl CoA molecule then enters the TCA cycle in an identical fashion as would an acetyl CoA produced from pyruvate, albeit in the case of pyruvate there is only one reaction needed. It is true that the remaining shortened fatty acid can once again participate in the four reaction steps of beta oxidation, but at this point, you are effectively in a "pure profit" mode, as you are now generating more energy than would be possible from pyruvate.

    Because verbal explanations of biochemical pathways can get rather involved, to help clarify matters it might be useful to provide a diagram of the various biochemical pathways, like beta oxidation, the TCA cycle, and electron transport chain so that people so inclined could actually count the number of steps involved. Upon realizing independently that there were not hundreds of reaction steps involved, your opponent's credibility is eroded. Your problem here, of course, is that you are the one who is saying that there are hundreds of reaction steps, whereas I am the one saying that there are only a handful of additional ones when it comes to fatty acid oxidation:

    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    It's not mantra, when you compare the huge amount of carbons, then consider you have to separate the hydrogens from the carbon atoms, break the oxygen molecule apart, then recombine all those atoms to make co2 and h2o. It takes hundreds of small reaction steps. But, whatever you say...
    Even if it were to take 20, 30, or maybe even 40 additional steps, the claim here is that it takes hundreds, the plural form making that at least 200 more, which makes the claimant seem prone to exaggeration and hyperbole, which again would serve to undermine credibility.

    Another approach to swaying people, especially when dealing with a very well elaborated scientific topic, is to point out where your opponent is using vague terminology, because that is indicative of muddled understanding. To reuse our example above, then, hundreds is very vague and smacks of hucksterism, precisely because nobody has any idea how many "hundreds" is. The number of reaction steps is deterministic. You can count them, if you actually understand the biochemistry.

    Another effective tactic is to show how your opponents thinking is sloppy and incomplete in general. For example:

    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    Since you ignored it the first time, I said fatty acids, degraded, not fats, again: before fatty acids can be oxidized, they must first undergo a priming step. Fatty acids in the cytoplasm must cross the mitachondria membrane before the oxidation begins; this was the point I was eluding to.
    This statement is true, but it applies equally well to carbohydrates, as pyruvate is shuttled across mitochondrial membranes by a transport protein. Moreover, pyruvate is the end product of a 10 reaction glycolysis process, which would certainly fall under the umbrella of an order of magnitude larger number of "priming steps" than fatty acids. All in all, that renders the argument moot, more of a case of six of one and a half dozen of the other.

    Although not nearly as suasive, you can point to your opponents overall sloppiness such as when they say elude when they actually mean allude. Although, the use of elude is actually quite amusing in a Freudian slip sort of way, when you consider that it can mean "failing to grasp", which actually would serve to make that read "this was the point that I was failing to grasp." Perhaps your subconscious is trying to tell you something? Nevertheless, you can then attempt to make a case for this sloppiness being pervasive in your opponent's thinking and presentation.

    It is also very helpful if you can point out how your opponent has misunderstood the basic science to which they claim mastery (i.e. "I knew all of that" ). So, when your opponent claims that the formation of acetyl CoA from fatty acids is a prerequisite input to beta oxidation, when in fact the whole purpose of beta oxidation is to form acetyl CoA from fatty acids as an input to the TCA cycle, you point that out. Again, diagrams are useful because they allow readers to make independent judgements, apart from merely accepting the opinion and provably incorrect assertions of your opponent.

    If you can establish that your opponent is prone to histrionics, that can be useful as well. It's actually really helpful if your opponent is generally defensive and prone to making accusations such as accusing you of "cherry picking." In such a case, you could point out that you were engaging in a process of rebuttal. That process is a refutation of specific points your opponent made that are false. To address these points rather than banal yet true assertions such as "oxygen makes bananas brown eventually" does not constitute cherry picking in any sense.

    A very effective technique is to ask direct questions of your opponent. Obviously, when they fail to answer them, they look increasingly less credible. Examples would be:

    "What are the relative rates of reaction of the enzymes involved in beta oxidation, and how does that compare to the rate of reaction of pyruvate dehydrogenase?"

    "How much more water is produced per unit of energy generated ( molecule of ATP ) by beta oxidation?"

    That last question represents a very effective technique because it constitutes a simultaneous attack on two fronts. First, it is the very specificity of the question that is most damaging because it requires deeper understanding of the subject matter, making it much less amenable to a quick internet search. As a result, an opponent with a superficial understanding will find it difficult to answer. But, assuming that they can muster an answer, the second and more subtle part of the attack lies in the answer itself, because it will directly contradict other statements made by your opponent. So either your opponent fails to answer the question, which erodes their credibility, or they manage to answer the question, which serves to erode their credibility.

    Lastly, as a rhetorical technique, profanity can be effective, although its effectiveness is inversely proportional to the frequency with which it is used. From what I've seen of your tendencies, you might consider that you are overusing this technique. Nevertheless, it is interesting that you dismiss out of hand replying to the majority of what I had to say on the basis that "half that shit is presumptuous." Apart from the fact that this is merely vacuous opinion lacking a preposition, I don't think presumptuous means what you think it does. My dictionary has it that a presumptuous person is one whose behaviour fails to observe the limits of what is permitted or appropriate. The juxtaposition of that word with your scatological expletive is again unintentionally, I'm sure, quite amusing.

    Since you feel entitled to speculate as to my psychological condition, I expect you would extend the same courtesy to me, so I shall speculate in return. Perhaps you never got over the anal fixation stage of childhood development? Or maybe behind that avatar really lurks a precocious toddler? That would truly be something and explain many things.

    -PK

    P.S. I regret that post length limits preclude my quoting you verbatim. Luckily, folks can scroll back to get a sense of your thinking process.
    Last edited by pklopp; 06-13-2013 at 07:05 AM.
    My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

    Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

  5. #85
    pklopp's Avatar
    pklopp is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by jackaaron View Post
    Regarding the bolded part, I'm really curious how you did this.

    My assumption is that you put in a few search terms (I'm sure you can remember), and found specific articles. Could you link those?

    I'm also assuming that when you say (I checked) you really did, that's why I'd like further information.
    Word to the wise, you are dealing with someone for whom :eyeroll: constitutes a valid argument. You are probably in for some disappointment.

    -PK
    My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

    Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

  6. #86
    jackaaron's Avatar
    jackaaron is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    US
    Posts
    64
    If I were a gambling man I would give about 30 to 1 odds that I will get a relevant answer. And relevance would be quite easy for those involved to determine,however its likely I would not get any action.
    Fortunately I'm not this type of gambler lol.

  7. #87
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Face it, Derpums. If you go up against PK on the science, you're gonna get schooled.

  8. #88
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,202
    You are visibly upset. I have no desire to engage in a pissing contest with a pseudo-intellectual blowhard, but after actually spending 2 minutes to skim over it, I can see what area I slipped up at, and where you're coming from with that whole post. When I was cutting and pasting from notepad, I left one thing in the wrong spot, while attempting to get the scientific jargon in order. I'm sure, as someone familiar to copying and pasting, you can understand. So, let's just nip this in the bud. It really should have read from fat metabolism, going from the original carbon part, then to acyl-coa in the cleavage stage of beta oxidation, to show the complexity of oxidating fats for co2, but somewhere along the line I messed it all up(I was admittedly tired that night). This was in my notepad: "finally acetyl-CoA is cleaved off with thiolase to yield an acyl-coa that is two carbons shorter than before. The cleaved acetyl-CoA can then enter into the TCA and ETC" but I figured you'd already explained beta oxidation enough and was only looking to show the energy wasting aspects of it anyway. It was more of an attempt at hyperbole on my part again, because, if I can make it look really fucking long maybe someone will look at it and go "holy shit fats are so complicated this guy is right I'm not reading that"

    It's kind of the same with all your picking and choosing of ATP output without a real fundamental knowledge on the real intricacies and variables involved. But, I guess we were only after an analytical hypothesis anyway.

    Admittedly, I could have formulated a much better argument against you had I actually paid attention, but I never really did. This part isn't an attack on your integrity, because you clearly really tried hard, but more of a fault of my own. I often stumble on here half dead from work, and usually don't come across people who spent the 30 minutes reading on google that you have, so, it caught me a little off guard.

    I'll be the first to admit I don't actually read your posts, because they're really boring, drawn out for no rhyme or reason, and I can find equal stimulation from flipping through a thesaurus, since this is definitely among your writing style. I'm all too familiar with it, having taken Lit 101 in community college.

    Nice paragraphs of ad hominems though, this will definitely make Paleobird fantasize about your avatar more. Sadly, I'm not very impressed, so if you were looking to get me riled up by these posts, your avatar, and that passive gay comment, combined with a creepy child reference, you're going to have to try a little harder, as I'm not easily impressed.
    nihil

  9. #89
    pklopp's Avatar
    pklopp is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by Derpamix View Post
    ... stunningly incoherent rant ...
    I find it quite remarkable that one of your principal objections to my writing style is that I substantiate what I say and that I try to make sure that my statements are accurate. You are a very dangerous individual because you speak with great conviction ( albeit with scant evidence ) on topics that you know vanishingly little about.

    I sincerely regret having engaged you in any discussion, but what is done is done. Lesson learned.

    -PK
    My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

    Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

  10. #90
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Learn More
    I just love it when someone gets a little bit of Latin under their belt and then accuses someone else of "ad hominem fallacies" while calling them "gay" and "creepy" in reference to children.

    But you sound so learned when you use latin terms.

    Seriously, Derpums, you are making my eyerolls emoticon get tired.

Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 78910 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •