GlitterInfection @ GlitterInfection @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

529

Joined

2 yr. ago

You missed my coronation? That's on you.

Well... Except for investors.

Games journalism is a cringe phrase that came up during gamer gate to try and justify sexism.

Y'all write fan reviews that are meant to help advertise products. That is all that has ever existed in the genre and is all anyone wants from it.

Landing on the boring planets wasn't my problem with the boring game.

The ground combat was terrible. The space flight was terrible. The space combat was terrible. And it was wedged into every activity for no reason other than lazy design to pad things.

And then there was the UI...

You can't "feel small" when the game makes you a fiddly murder hobo in the tutorial.

The statement they made, which I quoted, IS NOT BASED ON DECADES OF RESEARCH! It is based on their assumptions and the headline in this article.

The study we are talking about makes it very clear in its first paragraph that there has been little-to-no prior research on the effects of processed foods and depression.

Despite extensive data linking ultraprocessed foods (UPF; ie, energy-dense, palatable, and ready-to-eat items) with human disease,4 evidence examining the association between UPF consumption and depression is scant.

It is literally the justification for this specific study having been done at all.

This study only involved middle-aged white women (95% of participants) who didn't suffer from depression at the start of the study. It measured incident depression over the course of 15 years and correlated that with various processed food categories.

That person making the statement that processed foods increase the chance of depression in the general public is doing exactly what I was trying to get people to not do, which is turn this headline into false assumptions and unhelpful advice about general depression.

I hate these reddit moments.

Then go edit your post to remove the statement that contradicts what you're saying now.

What I am trying to do is to prevent people from reading the headline and making the false statement that you then made based off of it and using that to try and give advice about diet and exercise to people with clinical depression.

The point is that that ultra-processed or unhealthy foods increase the risk for depression in the general public.

This is you, making a false statement that is about the study OP posted, not general "not arguable" bodies of knowledge.

This is harmful, not helpful.

Edit: for those downvoting me, the quote from the person before me is NOT based on decades of non arguable research. It is only based on their opinions, biases, and the headline OP posted.

The study we are discussing opening paragraph says the following:

Despite extensive data linking ultraprocessed foods (UPF; ie, energy-dense, palatable, and ready-to-eat items) with human disease,4 evidence examining the association between UPF consumption and depression is scant.

Unless this random internet person knows more than these researchers, then I'd say that this person is doing the exact harmful thing I was trying to prevent.

No, the point is that there is a correlation between eating processed foods and developing "incident depression" over a 15 year period in mostly white populations of middle-aged women.

The study doesn't say what you're already claiming it does because of a headline, and that is what leads to very unhealthy advice given.

This study is going to lead to tons of wowthanksimcured advice for depressed people so I just want to state to anyone out there listening:

My most severe period of depression as an adult happened during a time where I was eating healthfully (almost no processed foods) and doing 5+ days per week of moderate-to-heavy exercise. I didn't drink or use drugs during that time either. It came on after 9 months of consistency and I powered through two more months, consistently eating right and exercising before it overwhelmed me.

It's super unhelpful to suggest eating right and exercising to a depressed person if you're not their licensed medical or mental health caregiver.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and for that, I am sorry.

Women weren't allowed to have ANY jobs less than a lifetime ago.

There is absolutely no logic in your leap from "I see bias" to "phisological differences in genders warrant differences in pay."

It's fallacy all the way down with a large rosy tinted privilege lens.

This pissed me off. The new Hyundai Kona EV's release is nothing but "we made it bigger!" The battery range isn't even longer by a noteworthy amount... Just "bigger and look how futuristic" cringe.

The key reason I got the 2020 was that it was the only EV that was comparable in size to my old Honda Fit. Making it bigger is the absolute worst thing you could do.

Australia.

Mine enjoys a variety of attachments, though.

Counterpoint: people have to get up at all kinds of horrible hours of the day in order to enslave themselves to their employers voluntarily, so letting them take back a few minutes of their day through passive aggressive mug-credos is the least we can do.

Yeah, well, I don't want to suck your eyes.

But traditional English is only spoken in America by hillbillies.

Well, OK, sure. Irrationality is logical in that it's human.

That's one great reason to learn self awareness and mindfulness.

You ended up agreeing with me in that last sentence.

Disregarding advice you know is good already because you don't respect the source is an emotional, not logical, choice.

Dismissing good advice because the person who gave it to you has flaws is the epitome of logical behavior!