Silverseren @ Silverseren @kbin.social

Posts

184

Comments

854

Joined

2 yr. ago

So 15% for a 60 kilogram human, on the lower end, would be the daily recommended amount for a 9 kilogram creature. A mouse weighs around 0.025 kilograms. So, that amount for the mice is for something 360 times larger.

Obviously it's more complicated than that with differing metabolisms and the like, but as a rough estimate, wow. That's a lot.

No, it has jurisdiction in the EU. And Lemmy is a part of the EU jurisdiction.

Unless the devs want to block everyone in the EU from accessing the site.

Sure. Lemmy does have such a presence though.

The existence and usage of bulldozers at the location was already confirmed and well known even during that time period. We just had no idea what the point of driving them there was. Since they wouldn't exactly be useful for digging up claimed tunnels that were several dozen feet underground.

I suppose now we know what the actual purpose of them was.

The existence and usage of bulldozers at the location was already confirmed and well known even during that time period. We just had no idea what the point of driving them there was. Since they wouldn't exactly be useful for digging up claimed tunnels that were several dozen feet underground.

I suppose now we know what the actual purpose of them was.

It's been a problem for a while. Considering major social media companies have already gotten massive fines from the EU for violating the GDPR, maybe the lemmy devs will put more effort in setting up a deletion system once the EU sends them a fine for breaking the law?

The GDPR is a required to comply EU law for all websites in their jurisdiction. You can't get away with claiming "but people choose to join the website".

Many other websites and even major social media sites have gotten fined and other sanctions put against them already for violating it.

Fructose doesn’t have the same health effects of sucrose for some reason

That's because fructolysis has a slightly different pathway and fate as compared to glycolysis, which results in far lower efficiency of conversion. Meaning glucose gets converted into more calories than fructose does.

There's a daily recommended amount for mice? Or was that 15% of the recommended amount for humans, which would be massive for mice?

If only we had gotten Skyrim in space.

It's so bizarre that you wouldn't have other sweeteners in other experimental groups and, especially, an experimental group that was actual sugar.

Oh no, I'm an actual scientist who knows molecular biology and the decades of research showcasing pseudoscience health claims to indeed be pseudoscience.

History check: it's the scientific community that showed cigarettes were bad for you years before the public ever listened to the facts.

And yet all the studies done on MSG have found no such effect. In fact, when conducting comparative tests where people were given a placebo but made to think it had MSG, they claimed they were having negative health effects.

This has been studied for decades and no evidence of a negative physiological impact has been shown. Especially since MSG was used in Asian cuisines in America for years prior with no such effects up until the hysteria the one writer caused.

Of course. But those sorts of impacts have not been shown for these amino acids in their otherwise much higher consumption concentrations. Unless you have phenylketonuria, but you'd know if you did already.

So you also believe in MSG health claims, despite that being a salt of glutamate, an amino acid found in all meats, mushrooms, and plenty other foods already.

There are plenty of studies done by those wishing to push pseudoscience claims. We wouldn't have people like Andrew Wakefield otherwise.

And nutrition is one such field that has an outsized amount of pseudoscience pushers.

Ah, another one of the "we found something in mice and that totally means it happens in humans" pseudoscience studies. Though we can probably blame the press for making such claims that the studies do not, unless this is one of those studies made by the known pseudoscience "scientists" like Seneff.

We know that when it’s consumed, aspartame splits into aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol, which can all affect the central nervous system.

This is precisely why this all sounds like BS and such studies have frequently been called out for their poor methodologies. Aspartic acid and phenylalanine are crucial amino acids that we consume in a bunch of foods at much higher concentrations. And the methanol produced in its breakdown is extremely minimal.

Hence why the vast amount of pseudoscience claims about aspartame have been debunked one after the other.

Like, it would be one thing if they were doing a more general test on tears of a variety of people and their impact on others and then found this potential impact that led them to do a more specific study resulting in this. But to zero in specifically on adult woman tears without any known prior reason for it feels...odd.

I feel like they should also have experimental groups of children and the elderly, to see whether age also has an effect on hormonal responses.

I suppose that applies both in regards to tears from and how tears affect. Hmm, I can see this getting rather complicated and extensive.