... it doesn't work!
SO much drama recently, in the LC/WAP/paleo blogosphere! Frankly, i find it almost as intellectually stimulating as broadcast television.
It doesn't matter how elegant a rodent laboratory experiment is, or how clear-cut the results. IF YOU DON'T SEE THE SAME RESULTS WITH REAL PEOPLE IN REAL-LIFE SITUATIONS, YOUR TRIAL MEANS BUPKIS.
Seems like i've heard this conclusion before. Makes sense. Why, then, do people fight it so hard? ...Must have something to do with egos.
[sigh] Damned if i don't wish the world HAD ended last week.
bupkis? Now that is a new one. I try to not give the crazies any more of the energy that they crave. Sometimes even that isn't enough. I wish everyone a great new year, and success in whatever they try.
ReplyDeletei'm dating myself yet again. first learned that Yiddish word here: http://www.hulu.com/watch/114036
ReplyDeleteGreat word. Is that where the phrase "not amounting to a hill of beans" comes from?
ReplyDeletethe best description of the latter seems to be here: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-hil2.htm
DeleteYiddish is a colorful language, isn't it? kinda like German printed in a cartoon font.... ;-)
Not sure what the kerfuffle is about, but Jenny Ruhl has been saying the same thing for years. Lab rodents get diabetes from high-fat diets; humans (with rare exceptions) don't.
ReplyDeleteI learned "bupkis" (any other valuable lessons) from Judge Judy.
kerfuffle to the left of us, kerfuffle to the right of us, kerfuffle in front of us.... ;-) it's not just the tantrum being thrown over at Peter's place, but the overdramatization of Jimmy's "mistake" and apparently some more stuff going on in blogs i refuse to read. i suspect people are working off holiday-time frustrations this way!
Deletecertainly mouse and rat models are helpful in working out how processes work in a mammalian body, but to claim that certain reactions are absolutely applicable to humans is first-class bullshit. i read half of goofdoctor's first response to Peter's column, and didn't read another word of his. i DID get a good chuckle out of Wooo's multi-part comment....
Oh, the David Duke thing? I'd already forgotten about it. With my lack of a background in organic chemistry, Peter's blog is too much work for too little payoff for me. I do like Feinman, though--he's funny.
Deletei read Feinman occasionally, but he doesn't seem to post often enough to get me hooked. Peter isn't ALWAYS as technical as he was there in the "protons series" -- i got bogged down in the middle of that, and ended up just taking away a few practical lessons. :-)
DeleteFeinman's blog is one of the best but you might need a scientific or medical background to appreciate it fully. His takedown of the intention to treat statistical approach in medical research was epic and should be compulsory reading for every medical researcher but it isn't because ITT is dogma / accepted consensus even though it's harmful and stupid and unscientific.
DeleteRe: Peter. Even though Jane was her usual unbelievably rude self, she was right in saying on the latest thread that his writing can be exceptionally cryptic / opaque. A lot of folks don't have time for deciphering riddles and want instant easily accessible information. That's fair enough. The Protons series for example would have much greater impact if it were written in a more comprehensible way. But it's his blog snd he is free to present information as he sees fit. I read everything he writes and I have re-read the archives too - a gold mine. IMO, his is the best blog. Even when he's wrong, he still gets you thinking in the right direction.
DeleteWoo's comments to Guyenet had me in stitches.
yeah, i read SOMEBODY on ITT (might have been Eades) and i was disgusted that anyone calling themselves "scientists" could support such intellectual dishonesty.... i also agree that Peter is often cryptic, but where his point is of consequence to ME, i've plugged away at it till i felt confident i understood him. ;-) of course, if JANE can't understand him he's GOT to be completely un-understandable!!!
DeleteEh , you notice my slick move where I patted CS on the back? Over at wooos pad? It was reverse pschology right? I wanted to LOLz after but hey, what would that accomplish. Peter is the classiest guy ever, he just let guyenet spew till he wore himself out, prolly had a chuckle or two checking in from time to time,...class. oh,.hope.ur new year sparkles Tess. You are a rising star but I hope that never changes your style or.content.
ReplyDeletei'm afraid i didn't get the complete impact of your exchange with CS, because i didn't read HER comment any more than i did G's, at Peter's place. ;-) i thoroughly dislike her sense of entitlement to insult others, but all Wooo has to do is HINT about HER, and she gets all full of injured innocence.... :-P
Deletethank you, and i hope you have a great new year, too! ...but i have to LOL at the compliment even while feeling flattered -- i'm just a frustrated writer who hasn't the imagination to come up with a good story line for a novel. :-D AND there's the esoteric notion that people with thyroid problems also have troubles in their fifth chakra, and part of the healing process is learning to speak out....
thanks for commenting here too -- your exchange with Cow was hilarious.
The Cow - xxxxxxxxx exchange was the highlight of my week which has been otherwise shitty due to too much bullshit drama all around.
DeleteI bet the Mooo/Wooo tickets our track to fame and glory!!!!!
DeleteTess good points, this is what I try to emphasize and is why I prefer N=1 personal experiences, because that is all that matters.
ReplyDeleteIf I make a post about study showing X, but it doesnt work for real people in the real world, then that study is useless.
K, this is why i run straight over to your blog when i see you've posted -- i have every confidence that you will have unearthed something that's actually APPLICABLE! i'm grateful to those of you who do the donkey-work of finding good studies and making them understandable (usually) to my semi-educated-but-not-lingo-savvy self.... have a great new year!
DeleteI enjoy posting theory but yes i still try to focus on posting stuff that is usable, I am afterall still trying to manage my own obesity.
DeleteWhat frustrates me more than anything is that I know I am in good health, I eat nutritious food, have good blood pressure, strong teeth,nails etc.
But my problem is because that Im so overweight, I am not aesthetically pleasing.
health IS the most important reason for us to eat carefully, i believe, but of course we want to ... not cringe when we look in a full-length mirror! :-) i've never been enamoured of my reflection -- fortunately, there ARE people out there who can love us for our characters rather than our looks.
Deletemy major aim in reducing weight is for the sake of being COMFORTABLE, and reducing joint pain. when i see very large people out in public, i always think of how uncomfortable they must be.