J.D. Zamfirescu-Pereira
14
4
J.D. Zamfirescu-Pereira has not written any posts yet.
J.D. Zamfirescu-Pereira has not written any posts yet.
I think you are missing my point -- which EY also makes above -- that you are concluding that the calorie consumption increase causes obesity when in fact none of the evidence you provide supports pointing the causal arrow in that direction specifically.
We know obese people eat more, and we know that the greater fat mass has greater nutritional requirements.
The interesting question is not whether 400 calories are associated with the weight gain, clearly people are more obese now and also they eat 400 more calories on average, no one is disputing this. The interesting question is whether those 400 calories cause the weight gain or are caused by the weight gain. You are implying the former but there is not a lot of evidence in support of it -- and other posters in this thread are chiming in with other evidence suggesting that 400 calories daily is well within normal historical variation, which is SMTM's point that "400 extra calories causes weight gain" would be weird.
I didn't downvote you, I think you are eloquently arguing your point here! But I'm not entirely sure that the SMTM take is quite as bad as you make it out to be.
An average of 400 extra calories a day isn't small on its own, but I think the SMTM argument is that it's small compared to historical variation in caloric intake, and small compared to variation among humans in general today. In other words: there were likely times and cultures historically where average calories consumed was higher or lower than today by more than 400 calories -- why wasn't there an obesity epidemic previously when caloric intake was higher? Why, 100... (read 363 more words →)
Because, those lawmakers you chose to bully were all vaccinated, so they were engaging in the exact same behavior you just criticized LA for trying to ban.
I don’t think Zvi was bullying them, more so just trying to highlight the hypocrisy of imposing mask restrictions on a population and then ignoring them yourself. It’s true that these particular lawmakers were not the same as the LA leadership, but the Democratic party as a whole is absolutely guilty of preaching/mandating one behavior publicly, and then privately flouting it themselves.
The real issue is that this kind of behavior makes the whole enterprise appear understandably suspect. Which is it: are masks necessary, in which case why are you taking a risk with your own life? Or are they unnecessary, in which case why are you supporting mandates? The conspiracy theorists‘ dream, really.
I think we are getting caught up in the definition of "small". My original point earlier is that 400 calories is small compared with historical variation and variation among humans. Your original point is that 400 calories is more than enough to explain the weight gain and thus isn't "small". Those are different definitions of small, and are both true: 400 calories is small compared with historical and present variation among humans AND 400 calories is enough to explain the extra weight.
But the latter is obvious; clearly those 400 calories explain the weight gain, because people aren't suddenly metabolizing air or water or other calorie-free inputs into extra weight, those fat cells... (read more)