Choose Theme

Find the Sexy Nerd Next Door? 

News & For Sale “CSPI, here's salt in your eye” by Kirei the Klown

item
Member
Kirei the Klown 6 years ago on 05/16/13
Equipped: Chicken & Waffles named "My baby daddy love him some Roscoes!"
Back in 2005, the CSPI declared salt/sodium "the forgotten killer" of 150,000 people a year. http://www.cspinet.org/new/200502242.html This started a wave of concern among the public and the food industry, kicking off salt-reduction strategies at many major food companies in order to respond to worried consumers.

This week, a report showed that cutting salt below current recommended levels (about 2300 mg daily) does not significantly benefit people who are over 50, black, and those with high blood pressure, diabetes and kidney disease. http://...msn.com/...us-should-cut-the-salt?ocid=anshlth11

I've heard a few people discuss this in the news, and it seems most are worried that the message taken away from this study will be that reducing salt is unneccesary. However, considering that Americans consume more than 3000 mg a day on average, well over the daily recommendation, it seems like a modest cutback is still quite reasonable.

item
Member
nategri 6 years ago on 05/20/13
Equipped: Clue Stick named "Some Sense"
Something is the fuck rotten in Denmark when it comes to human nutritional science. I don't know what it is, but how many frigging decades of flip-flopping have there been on how many frigging nutrients over the decades?

This could be just par-for-the-course assbad science reporting by journalists at work, but even THAT couldn't account for the sheer amount of garbage that comes out of these studies.

Either their methodologies are pathological, or they're missing some crucial factor. This is a field that badly needs some introspection.
item
Member
John Booty 6 years ago on 05/21/13
Equipped: Sparkledonkey's Gallbladder
You know what I think?

Toss most of this research. All of this conflicting research proves exactly one thing to me: there's no real way to tell how anybody's body is going to react to a certain food.

Replace it with personal metrics.

For example: we don't know what effect a piece of steak or seal blubber is going to have on a particular human being's internal cholesterol or iron levels, but we do have a really good idea about what kinds of cholesterol and iron levels are healthy.

So we should skip the guesswork and measure directly. Ideally we'd all get bloodwork and/or other tests done once a month. Or maybe more often. Cholesterol too high? Adjust accordingly. Low on Vitamin D? Adjust accordingly. And so forth. Measure again next month.

It's almost duh obvious. The only problem is that it's expensive out-of-pocket. I've seen SpectraCell recommended, but it's close to $400. http://www.spectracell.com I would like to find out if my insurance will cover this. I have enough minor health issues that maybe we I can get it paid for once or twice a year.
item
Member
nategri 6 years ago on 05/21/13
Equipped: Clue Stick named "Some Sense"
100% with you.

I also think cheap gene sequencing + the nascent 'nutritional genomics' sciences (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutritional_genomics) are gonna step in and (FINALLY) save our collective ass.

But of course this means the whole healthcare and possibly food industry would have to be retooled and I am a ridiculous optimist for thinking that's possible haha.
PS: btw did you know that what foods you eat can affect what frigging genes you currently express? like, NO ONE, knows this. i sure didn't until a few months ago.

sorry that is way off topic haha -- but it IS useful insomuch as it points out what a big, woolly world it is out there. genes affect food, food affects genes.
item
Member
John Booty 6 years ago on 05/22/13
Equipped: Sparkledonkey's Gallbladder
That's funny you mention it - I heard about it literally on Monday when it was briefly mentioned in a podcast and I don't know anything about it yet other than having heard about it. Do we apologize to Lamarck now? (Kidding)

http://...time.com/...azine/article/0,9171,1952313,00.html

Bygren and other scientists have now amassed historical evidence suggesting that powerful environmental conditions (near death from starvation, for instance) can somehow leave an imprint on the genetic material in eggs and sperm. These genetic imprints can short-circuit evolution and pass along new traits in a single generation.

You need a paid membership to reply to this thread.

Paid memberships are four bucks a month or twenty bucks a year. Cheap!

However, creating an account is free. Members without paid accounts can use a lot of the site's features without ever paying anything.

Be awesome. Create an account!

Geek dating and social networking for awesome people.

Sign Up. Join OtakuBooty!

OtakuBooty is where smart, funny, sexy nerds meet. Creating an account is free. Full membership is $4/month or $15/year. Cheap!

Press People. Need material? Cover OB for your site, blog, podcast, magazine, or what-have-you.  More info »

Want Your Stuff Reviewed By OB? Just send us your press releases and requests to review your products.