The examples usually given are more general "messing with the environment"
You know what's the most radical "messing with the environment" thing that humans ever did?
It's called agriculture.
I think it turned out pretty well.
That is extremely controversial for some reason.
And that reason is unclear to you?
I think it turned out pretty well.
Well, that remains to be seen.
Ask for consultation with a rheumatologist
learn about Definitions and methods for analytic time horizon, discounting, and inflation.
Try to understand price cap regulation - price cap regulation wherein a cap is placed on the pre-tax cigarette manufacturers' price but not on the retail price that consumers face.
Apply to become a US professor for lower barriers to entry and career capital
Competition for assistant professor positions in many fields is rapidly growing; the number of PhD graduates is rising, while the number of assistant professor openings remains roughly constant.[16] The opposite is true, however, in business disciplines, where the anticipated shortfall of business faculty may reach 2,400 openings by 2012.[17] The U.S. Occupation Outlook Handbook notes that a significant proportion of any growth in academic professor jobs will be due to "part-time and non tenure-track positions."[1] As of 2003, the average age at which scientists received tenure in the United States was 39, which can make it difficult for professors to balance professional and family obligations
-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professors_in_the_United_States#Non-tenure-track_positions
So I'll be sure to go for a business PhD
Hone your planning skillz and get a feel for population level competence
Steer your friends towards radical centrism
special project: friday
I once TA'd a statistics class in which the chocolate/Nobel Prize thing was used as the prototypical example for why correlation doesn't equal causation. Scientific American describes some problems with the study and plausible alternative explanations.
On the other hand, the cocoa may have some health benefits with respect to all-cause mortality, and the flavonoids likely have cognitive and other health benefits.
On the other other hand, the sugar surely doesn't, and chocolate has a lot of aluminum and maybe lead -- the latter is definitely not good for your brain, and the former might not be.
In any case, if you're going to take it up for health reasons, a spoonful of unsweetened cocoa in your oatmeal or coffee every morning is probably better than a Cadbury's egg.
View more: Prev
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Let's follow your link. It says:
So, out of that list you think chocolate is especially problematic? X-/
I guess whether > 3 mg/kg is a "lot" compared to other food types is relative to the number of food types the study considered.
I haven't dug up the France study to see how many foods they looked at that didn't make the >3 mg/kg cut, but the first study that I clicked on after searching Google scholar just now is a German study that found a median mg/kg of 160 for "cocoa powder" and 39 for "chocolate". Of the 1,431 food samples they tested, "77.8% had an aluminium concentration of less than 10 mg kg-1. Of the samples, 17.5% had aluminium concentrations between 10 and 100 mg kg-1. In only 4.6% of the samples, aluminium concentrations greater than 100 mg kg-1 were found.". Looking at the histogram in Figure 1, we can place chocolate's median aluminum level of 39 in the top 13.7% percent or higher, and cocoa powder's of 160 in the top 4.6% or higher.
I'm well aware of the irony that in my above post I suggested substituting cocoa powder for chocolate.
In particular, the study notes that "Table 4 shows that the PTWI for aluminium can be reached only by consumption of large amounts of chocolate [42–44]." (PTWI = provisional tolerable weekly intake used by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives).
Are there plenty of other foods with as much aluminum as chocolate? Sure. Am I cutting chocolate out of my own diet anytime soon? No. But since the original poster is planning to take up chocolate consumption specifically for brain/intelligence -related reasons, I figured it was a relevant consideration.
edit: It's kind of an odd list of foodstuffs the German study considered. The introduction implies but doesn't state that they selected foods that they expected to have at least some aluminum content based on prior research. I also can't account for the huge discrepancies between the French and German studies in terms of mg/kg aluminum levels detected.