This is why people are fat

[Analti_Calte_Equity]

@bchad

@Matt_Likes_Analysis

has editing been removed from AF?

Not on purpose… the tech guys are looking into it.

cmon bchad lets keep it off and play for keeps, verbally that is

[Ghibli]

@Matt_Likes_Analysis

pa. your argument is basically “new = bad”. you have not proof that grains are bad, only that grains are a new addition to the diet and it is perceived that we are currently in bad health as a species. if you remember correctly, 5000 years ago people lived to age 30 and ate 1/4 of what we currently eat. if anything, i’d say it’s the quantity of food consumed more so than what is being consumed.

bchad. i’d expect polynesians to have a fairly grain free diet. mostly roots and seafood. few pieces of land or river systems to grow grains.

Ding. Ding. Ding. We have a wiiner! It seems the debate is why obese societies consume more calories. There is no debate that is the case, right? Why is that so hard for you flat earthers to acknowledge? The “why” is an interesting discussion and a lot of good arguments have been made, but the fact americans overeat remains. Say it! Say it! You can do it!

[bchad]

@purealpha

@bchad

The problem with PA’s analysis is that he presupposes some kind of optimal human based on what was optimal 20,000 years ago, which I’ll bet he’s not really even able to define if we press him on it. We can’t really talk about what is optimal without trying to define it in ways that can be measured.

You keep making these bets, and keep losing. I wonder if you have checked the score recently?

Uhh, perhaps not having the five metrics of metabolic syndrome would be a good place to start? These five metrics can be measured. Foods with a high delta (see my earlier forumla) increase these markers, foods with low delta decrease these markers. This is science, decades of data, it is known.

It’s not nearly so mysterious and unknowable as you believe, as with most things it’s easy once the correct answer becomes known. This is just all new information for you guys, too overwhelming.

I’ve moderated a lot, and I can tell you that I am totally winning in points against you. And what’s great about arguing with you, is that it doesn’t even matter how I measure the points. I just tell you I’m right and I win.

APwned!

[Ghibli]

^PA found a hammer and thinks everything is a nail. I’m surprised you haven’t bored of his banter. It’s cute at first and then you start realizing what is behind the screen.

[itera]

Wasn’t there a study that concluded that rats which ate the very least possible to survive lived like 2x longer

[bchad]

Yeah, but those rats never had to run away from a predator…

[system]

@Matt_Likes_Analysis

your argument is basically “new = bad”.

if you remember correctly, 5000 years ago people lived to age 30 and ate 1/4 of what we currently eat.

Oh good grief, two always-mentioned thinking errors. But you did them both at once!!

Hey guys, instead of obsessing on creating “arguments” to prove how smart you are or whatever (and then dying of a metabolic syndrome disease), just print my elegant theory out and think about it for decades. Check back in 30 years, or maybe 30,000 years…eventually the dipshits will figure it out. Or maybe not?

[Robotech]

@ohai

I think I finally figured this out. purealpha is the mutant supervillain Apocalypse. This explains his superiority complex, as well as his preoccupation with the devolution of humans.

This makes sense.

[Yayyywork]

@Ghibli

^PA found a hammer and thinks everything is a nail. I’m surprised you haven’t bored of his banter. It’s cute at first and then you start realizing what is behind the screen.

+1 he is a strange strange person

[system]

@Ghibli

^PA found a hammer and thinks everything is a nail.

In my decades analyzing macro-type problems I’ve heard all the “words of wisdom” you can imagine kiddo. In 2007 my CFA boss told me “but CDOs are just different tranches of risk/return, we should not be afraid of that which we do not understand”, in response to my recommendation NOT to be holding those. Thanks for reading directly from the CFA text book Teresa, a very BChad type response! What matters in an analysis is being right. Who here can disprove my elegant formula? [everyone shushes up because they can’t even remember back 10 minutes to what the forumla was…LOL, see related decreasing cranial capacity thread]

[Analti_Calte_Equity]

@purealpha

@Ghibli

^PA found a hammer and thinks everything is a nail.

In my decades analyzing macro-type problems I’ve heard all the “words of wisdom” you can imagine kiddo. In 2007 my CFA boss told me “but CDOs are just different tranches of risk/return, we should not be afraid of that which we do not understand”, in response to my recommendation NOT to be holding those. Thanks for reading directly from the CFA text book Teresa, a very BChad type response! What matters in an analysis is being right. Who here can disprove my elegant formula? [everyone shushes up because they can’t even remember back 10 minutes to what the forumla was…LOL, see related decreasing cranial capacity thread]

thats a great story about your CFA boss

but really you just like to rant on here about subjects that cause controversy with nothing to back it up

[S2000magician]

@purealpha

In 2007 my CFA boss told me “but CDOs are just different tranches of risk/return, we should not be afraid of that which we do not understand”, in response to my recommendation NOT to be holding those.

So you were right about something 9 years ago and that’s supposed to prove that you’re right about something completely unrelated today?

I’d mention the difference between proof and evidence, but this isn’t even evidence.

[itera]

I think someone who would use that as a support to their argument is either really young and immature, or a dbag.

[Ghibli]

Well, the question should have been which foods are nutritious, but here are the results. Nobody asks if a 2X4 is healthy and I can assure you a cooked pork chop is dead. My diet consists of much of the bottom-left quartile and my blood work could not be better. There is even some evidence, given my cholesterol numbers, plaque cannot form in my arteries. Go figure.

[Analti_Calte_Equity]

meh … I agree with 70%

[Turd_Fergeson]

@Matt_Likes_Analysis

pa. your argument is basically “new = bad”. you have not proof that grains are bad, only that grains are a new addition to the diet and it is perceived that we are currently in bad health as a species. if you remember correctly, 5000 years ago people lived to age 30 and ate 1/4 of what we currently eat. if anything, i’d say it’s the quantity of food consumed more so than what is being consumed.

bchad. i’d expect polynesians to have a fairly grain free diet. mostly roots and seafood. few pieces of land or river systems to grow grains.

actually there’s a fairly large and growing body of evidence that grains are in fact very bad for humans for a whole host of reasons. Same with sugar.

Just off off the top of my head - inhibits nutrient absorption, causes leaky gut, acidity causes inflammation, all of which affect overall mood, cognitive function, durability, immune system. Shall I continue or are you ready to apologize for such an offensively ill-informed statement?

[system]

@Analti\_Calte\_Equity

but really you just like to rant on here about subjects that cause controversy with nothing to back it up…

Except for the whole 1000hrs of analysis thing, combined with a long track record of being right (much of it documented on here). My speciality are macro-problems, too big for people to see the obvious. The dabblers always say the same thing, time passes, I’m right, they change their story to “we always knew that”, then restart the cycle. That chart above is yet another example of the blind-to-evolution stupidity. Zero basis for what Americans and “nutritionists” believe, so why ask them? Opinions do not alter biology, time does. Reorganizing that chart using my elegant formula gives the correct answer.

[Analti_Calte_Equity]

@purealpha

@Analti\_Calte\_Equity

but really you just like to rant on here about subjects that cause controversy with nothing to back it up…

Except for the whole 1000hrs of analysis thing, combined with a long track record of being right (much of it documented on here). My speciality are macro-problems, too big for people to see the obvious. The dabblers always say the same thing, time passes, I’m right, they change their story to “we always knew that”, then restart the cycle. That chart above is yet another example of the blind-to-evolution stupidity. Zero basis for what Americans and “nutritionists” believe, so why ask them? Opinions do not alter biology, time does. Reorganizing that chart using my elegant formula gives the correct answer.

1000 hours of analysis on a different subject than mentioned means nothing

[system]

@Analti\_Calte\_Equity

1000 hours of analysis on a different subject than mentioned means nothing

Nope, 1000 hours of analysis on this subject. And it means something, cause I got correct answer.

Speaking of which, hmm I notice nobody has challenged the fact that my formula backtests flawlessly, they never do. Because there are zero observations which are not explained by it.

[igor555]