Page 10 of 20 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 193

Thread: Help Shut my CICO Friend Up - THE GHEE CHALLENGE page 10

  1. #91
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post

    Anyhow.... please proceed.

    I still think she should kick him in the balls and drink the ghee
    and then eat him.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  2. #92
    Alan Aragon's Avatar
    Alan Aragon is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    wrong. I'm not the one cherrypicking. JJ is. He asked me to put up papers refuting his two listed papers. I posted a blanket Google Scholar for "fructose obesity" and "fructose metabolic syndrome". Could it be that is two papers has it right and all the rest are wrong? Sure. But I don't think anyone believes fructose is toxic in the acute, hence my posting the link Dr Richard Johnson's interview. MY belief (is that word good enough for you?) is that Johnson is closer to the truth, that our ancestors only ate fructose during a short window each year and that it appears fructose triggers a metabolic "switch" (Johnson's word) causing animals (not just humans) to put on fat for the coming winter lean months. Orangutans put on weight during times when fruit is abundant (http://cherylknott.files.wordpress.c...999-thesis.pdf), and bears fatten up on berries in anticipation of winter. Johnson believes its the same for humans and that the switch is intracellular uric acid affecting ATP energy production....fructose makes you want to sit on your ass (couch potato?), move less, and eat more. Is he wrong? He might be but I'm not a researcher and his argument make sense, to me (is that qualification enough for you?), from an evolutionary POV.

    So from Dr Johnson's fructose argument what's changed? Now fructose is available 24/7 and the consumption is no longer seasonally acute but is consumed daily by most people; do our bodies think, all the time, it's that seasonal time of year to put on fat? Is year round chronic consumption of fructose producing the triglycerides and VLDL...and insulin resistance causing Metabolic Syndrome due to the chronic consumption of fructose? IOW causing all those symptoms that Lustig talks about? You're the nutritionist, what do you think?
    To answer your question, I'd first say that relying on animal models is misleading, especially in the presence of human research. What I'd like you to do is read White's paper, and while you do this, suspend your bias against industry-funded research. I'm working on a study right now that's being funded by a sports supplement company, and have made firm prior agreement that they will have exactly ZERO say in how the data is gathered, processed, presented, and interpreted. In other words, ZERO involvement in the study. I thus have personal experience with research funding, and know first hand that it does not automatically equate to biased research. Anyway, here's White's paper, please give it a thorough read & let me know what sort of contentions you have: Challenging the Fructose Hypothesis: New Perspectives on Fructose Consumption and Metabolism

  3. #93
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    Why am I not surprised? But you don't have a bias....just like I may not have a bias about horizontally fracking oil/gas wells?
    I guess my sarcasm didn't shine through. I don't represent Pepsi, it was a joke.
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

  4. #94
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Aragon View Post
    Do yourself a favor & review Scott's tone & language in this thread. Snarky would actually be a euphemistic way to put it. He's downright hostile (particularly to Jake). In contrast, my tone is matter-of-fact to him & 100% civil - and borderline gentle - with you. I'm not really sure why you're taking things the way you are. But, if you have no questions or contentions to raise, then our discussion is done.
    I think I've had this argument with him before. I suspected then that his job relied upon selling fructose. I just didn't realize how close to the truth I was.....but Jake, working for Pepsi, doesn't have a bias towards Lustig at all? Snarky? Yeah, I can get snarky pretty quick when someone out of the box accuses me of not using logic without first asking me to qualify what I might have meant or where I was coming from.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  5. #95
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    I guess my sarcasm didn't shine through. I don't represent Pepsi, it was a joke.
    do tell. I stand corrected
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  6. #96
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Aragon View Post
    To answer your question, I'd first say that relying on animal models is misleading, especially in the presence of human research. What I'd like you to do is read White's paper, and while you do this, suspend your bias against industry-funded research. I'm working on a study right now that's being funded by a sports supplement company, and have made firm prior agreement that they will have exactly ZERO say in how the data is gathered, processed, presented, and interpreted. In other words, ZERO involvement in the study. I thus have personal experience with research funding, and know first hand that it does not automatically equate to biased research. Anyway, here's White's paper, please give it a thorough read & let me know what sort of contentions you have: Challenging the Fructose Hypothesis: New Perspectives on Fructose Consumption and Metabolism
    I'll do that but I also want you to send it to Mark Sisson for his (and any of his professional associates he might want to corroborate with) to review.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  7. #97
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    I think I've had this argument with him before. I suspected then that his job relied upon selling fructose. I just didn't realize how close to the truth I was.....but Jake, working for Pepsi, doesn't have a bias towards Lustig at all? Snarky? Yeah, I can get snarky pretty quick when someone out of the box accuses me of not using logic without first asking me to qualify what I might have meant or where I was coming from.
    I am sorry that you didn't catch my joke, it looked like it would be taken in a joking way when I wrote it, but I guess I was wrong
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

  8. #98
    Alan Aragon's Avatar
    Alan Aragon is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    I'll do that but I also want you to send it to Mark Sisson for his (and any of his professional associates he might want to corroborate with) to review.
    Mark is free to review White's paper as he pleases - not sure what he has to do with it. This is a discussion between you & me & the lurkers here. If Mark wants to chime in or debate, great.

  9. #99
    Scott F's Avatar
    Scott F is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by Alan Aragon View Post
    Mark is free to review White's paper as he pleases - not sure what he has to do with it. This is a discussion between you & me & the lurkers here. If Mark wants to chime in or debate, great.
    Ping him and let him know about it. It's his profession to review the research and report it to his blog. I'm just a poster who occasionally reads and posts to this forum....and I don't do much of that anymore because of BS posting like this.
    Would I be putting a grain-feed cow on a fad diet if I took it out of the feedlot and put it on pasture eating the grass nature intended?

  10. #100
    Alan Aragon's Avatar
    Alan Aragon is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    22
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott F View Post
    Ping him and let him know about it. It's his profession to review the research and report it to his blog. I'm just a poster who occasionally reads and posts to this forum....and I don't do much of that anymore because of BS posting like this.
    LOL, are you serious? I have no interest in, plus I have better bedside manners than dragging folks I don't personally know into this discussion out of the blue. I'm merely suggesting that you balance out your perspective by reading White's paper. This is for your learning benefit; Mark has nothing to do with this. If you choose not to read it, then oh well, that's on you. The world will continue to turn, it's really no skin off anyone's back.

Page 10 of 20 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... 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
  •