Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 78
Thanks Tree55Thanks

Thread: 7 bad science and health ideas that should die with 2016

  1. #11
    Wrinkly Member Dangermouse's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    20,079
    Thanks
    17659

    From
    Sunny Bournemouth, Dorset
    One cupcake takes 30 minutes of moderate exercise to burn off. On that basis #1 is effectively true. Ypu work out for an hour, then take a sports drink and put all the calories back. It's more effective to not eat the cupcake or drink the drink, than to exercise.
    Thanks from EnigmaO01, Blueneck and Kontrary

  2. #12
    Council Member Djinn's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    40,257
    Thanks
    24947

    From
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by Dangermouse View Post
    One cupcake takes 30 minutes of moderate exercise to burn off. On that basis #1 is effectively true. Ypu work out for an hour, then take a sports drink and put all the calories back. It's more effective to not eat the cupcake or drink the drink, than to exercise.


    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey, EnigmaO01 and BigLeRoy

  3. #13
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11,977
    Thanks
    8018

    From
    The greatest place on Earth California
    I am of the old belief that a human system that is not used gets weak. So I try to get exposed to every bacteria I can. I try to keep my body moving and this keeps my mouth shut and my metabolism cooking. As for the earth being warmer from man made poisons consider the phito-plankton's lose of calcium which is needed by the next step in the food chain plankton. It is all very simple. Earth will take care of us if we take care of her.
    Thanks from Blueneck

  4. #14
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    11,977
    Thanks
    8018

    From
    The greatest place on Earth California
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post


    My size cupcake!!!!! Yumm Yum yum.

  5. #15
    Senior Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11,829
    Thanks
    2028

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    Mrs. RNG was a clinical dietitian and remains active and interested. Do you have any links to real studies that show GMOs to be harmful?

    I won't bother asking for denier links.
    Funny thing, it's kinda like AGW research, where anything that goes against the money is dismissed as "fake" by whatever means possible.

    I've seen it too many times, had you not said "links to real studies" I might have assumed that you were actually interested in the research and not just interested in the mantra pushed to originally pass gmo's into open agriculture; "it looks like it's non-modified counterpart, therefore it can be treated the same as the non-modified counterpart".

    This is such a novel technology with so many unknown implications, that the 90 day safety studies are insufficient, even though it is industry standard.

    But anyway, unless your counter gets into problems with methodology as opposed to "this study was not funded by Monsanto (real studies) therefore it is not accurate" type of rejection, something your post, through experience, tells me is an unreasonable expectation.

  6. #16
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,440
    Thanks
    4126

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    Funny thing, it's kinda like AGW research, where anything that goes against the money is dismissed as "fake" by whatever means possible.

    I've seen it too many times, had you not said "links to real studies" I might have assumed that you were actually interested in the research and not just interested in the mantra pushed to originally pass gmo's into open agriculture; "it looks like it's non-modified counterpart, therefore it can be treated the same as the non-modified counterpart".

    This is such a novel technology with so many unknown implications, that the 90 day safety studies are insufficient, even though it is industry standard.

    But anyway, unless your counter gets into problems with methodology as opposed to "this study was not funded by Monsanto (real studies) therefore it is not accurate" type of rejection, something your post, through experience, tells me is an unreasonable expectation.
    Nice cop-out. Were you going to lay some crap an informercial wannabe is proposing? That's what I was dismissing out of hand.

    If you have links to actual studies with controls, hopefully double blind studies, I and even more, Mrs. RNG would love to see them.

    But I don't think such things exist.

  7. #17
    Master political analyst Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    10,081
    Thanks
    4474

    From
    The formerly great golden state
    Quote Originally Posted by Djinn View Post


    A ten day backpack would probably burn off the calories in that one.
    Thanks from Dangermouse

  8. #18
    Master political analyst Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    10,081
    Thanks
    4474

    From
    The formerly great golden state
    Quote Originally Posted by bmanmcfly View Post
    Funny thing, it's kinda like AGW research, where anything that goes against the money is dismissed as "fake" by whatever means possible.

    I've seen it too many times, had you not said "links to real studies" I might have assumed that you were actually interested in the research and not just interested in the mantra pushed to originally pass gmo's into open agriculture; "it looks like it's non-modified counterpart, therefore it can be treated the same as the non-modified counterpart".

    This is such a novel technology with so many unknown implications, that the 90 day safety studies are insufficient, even though it is industry standard.

    But anyway, unless your counter gets into problems with methodology as opposed to "this study was not funded by Monsanto (real studies) therefore it is not accurate" type of rejection, something your post, through experience, tells me is an unreasonable expectation.
    Yes, it's a lot like AGW research. In fact, I think it addresses the issue of AGW. When science comes up with something that people don't want to believe, then they will dismiss it regardless of the evidence.

    The thing is, though, science doesn't care what you believe or don't believe. That would be religion that's based on faith rather than empirical evidence.

  9. #19
    Senior Member bmanmcfly's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    11,829
    Thanks
    2028

    From
    C-A-N-A-D-A-Eh
    Quote Originally Posted by Dittohead not! View Post
    Yes, it's a lot like AGW research. In fact, I think it addresses the issue of AGW. When science comes up with something that people don't want to believe, then they will dismiss it regardless of the evidence.

    The thing is, though, science doesn't care what you believe or don't believe. That would be religion that's based on faith rather than empirical evidence.
    Except, while I can't speak for others, I dispute MOST of agw, not because "I don't want to believe" in the cult level beliefs, but because the data does not match the hypothesis.

  10. #20
    Veteran Member EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    16,063
    Thanks
    8273

    From
    Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by April15 View Post
    Earth will take care of us if we take care of her.
    And the earth will eliminate us if we don't take care of the earth.
    Thanks from Kontrary

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 291
    Last Post: 29th June 2016, 09:48 PM
  2. Replies: 92
    Last Post: 6th July 2015, 10:26 AM
  3. Another anti-science Republican on the House science committee..
    By teamosil in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 8th October 2012, 03:48 AM
  4. Obama backs 4 GOP health care ideas
    By Winn in forum Healthcare
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 8th March 2010, 11:46 AM
  5. Global Warming Science isn't Science
    By conservative in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 2nd December 2007, 01:50 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed