"Finnish researchers found that a vegan diet changed the gut microbiome, and that this change was linked to an improvement in arthritis symptoms."
I had a suspicion when I started reading this article that the simplest solution would be to cut meat out of the diet.
It's astounding how many problems are solved medically, environmentally, economically, and of course ethically if we simply stop consuming meat, or at least stop consuming it at such extreme levels!
The question I wonder about -- and I speak as a non meat-eater -- is whether it is, indeed, the meat itself that is at fault, or the payload of antibiotics, growth hormones, colourants, preservatives, etc. that are the product of contemporary factory-style production of meat.
Those things are no doubt playing a huge role, but as a person increases their consumption of meat they may also be crowding out fiber. Fiber is substrate for the microbiome. Listen to what Dr. Justin Sonnenburg out of the department of microbiology & immunology at Stanford has to say about the importance of fiber...
https://youtu.be/gOZcbNw7sng?t=6m19s
I would go as far as to say that the alterations we are making to plants, might also have long term unforeseen negative effects, that we are yet to appreciate.
Sometimes I think the fact that we can "hack" nature, doesn't mean we should.
There are many sources which demonstrate that it's fairly simple to get all the nutrients you need by only eating plants. My own experience (and that of the vegans I know) also reflects this.
Another good reason to stop eating meat altogether. Since I've been vegetarian, and now vegan, I've lost weight, gained energy, and feel so much better. I feel as if my mind is much sharper than it used to be when I ate meat.
This would not only be much healthier for these people (and all people) but it would also be cheaper. Examine the logic from any angle you choose, and the solution is quite apparent.
P.S. Yes, I expected the downvotes. But it's still worth speaking up when there is an obvious solution to these kinds of problems...
I started praying to this cool rock I found, and the moon is in Sagittarius; guess what?! I've lost 5 pounds and am getting performance compliments at work!
It's an anecdote from me personally, but there is a large wealth of research that's easy to find on the subject. I encourage you to do more reading if it interests you.
Eating a healthy diet is always better than an unhealthy one, regardless of what that diet consists of.
You are probably bring down voted for inferring that meat here is the problem. it is not. it is vast quantities of low quality poor meat/fat. If you at 4000 calories of vegetables each day, you too would be obsese.
Yes, you're generally right about caloric intake being the main problem. Meat is a problem for many other reasons.
However, it's doubtful that people would gorge themselves on vegetables were meat not available. And, even if they did, 4000 calories of vegetables is still far healthier than 4000 calories of meat.
The comments in this thread evidence what a great ploy this was.
First, Outrageous CEO generates a mild uproar, irritating nerds, and generating press. Irritated nerds tweet about T-Mobile, causing it to trend. Bonus: everyone is branded for several minutes by the big pink T in the background of the video.
Second, he issues the apology. TechCrunch article. Twitter. More press for T-Mobile and Binge On. Everyone opines on the matter as if any part of it is meaningful.
Next, he'll meet with the EFF and make a pledge to support them. More chatter, more branding, and now some goodwill to boot.
Net result: Everyone is talking about T-Mobile instead of their competitors.
I'm more interested in who we classify as people. Remember, the word person comes from persona, meaning an actor's mask.
In 2014 it was discovered that a species of Long-finned pilot whales (a type of dolphin) has more neocortical neurons than humans by a factor of two! The neocortex is an area of the brain associated with language and conscious thought.
Do these dolphins count as people? Should we afford them "human" rights? What about other species?
The pig you eat has the same amount of neurons in her cerebral cortex as your cat and dog put together. The cow, more than all three put together. Are they people?
Trying to define personhood using any sort of scientific analysis is a dangerous road that was/is used to justify horrific acts of racism, violence, and subjugation, including Social Darwinism in the early 1900s, and the eugenics movement that followed.
I can think of no objective testable definition of person which is both meaningful (i.e. non-trivial) and not horrific for corner cases or those that would be excluded.
I know this wasn't your intention because you're using it to grant personhood to more entities but the implications aren't great regardless.
No, this is the wrong approach. The object is not to define personhood through some objective set of criteria which can then be used to justify evil; it's to use our observations about the world to arrive at a broader and more humane outlook.
The argument itself is wrong as well. If some method X is used for evil, it does not mean X is intrinsically evil.
This is essentially the same flawed argument that's used against many areas of science.
You make a good point, but remember that it doesn't cover 100% of those "secret knowledge" groups. Some self-help books really are helpful. Some conspiracy theories really are true.
Think about mathematics. That's a truth that many people refuse to see or accept, yet it's plainly visible.
Uber's endgame is to roll out globally with an attractive platform for users and an enticing offer for drivers, gain a dominant market share in as many markets as possible, then steadily replace all human drivers with self-driving cars. This will happen over the next several decades.
At that point, the company will maintain service centers for their fleets, whose maintenance costs will be low enough to significantly increase their profit margins. Those larger profits will, of course, flow to the relatively small number of shareholders instead of being distributed among a larger human workforce, as they are currently.
Listen to Peter Thiel. The endgame for superlative companies is monopoly.
And in Germany, where some of the largest Taxi dispatch services are already owned by the car manufacturers (Mercedes has a majority share in MyTaxi, for example), this is also possible – and without Uber ever being able to compete, as they can never be as cheap as a car manufacturer doing everything, from every bolt and screw to the taxi in-house.
Well, I don't know. A typical HN reader should not be surprised by this. You know technology, you know how Google operates, it should be fairly obvious that they store everything, forever.
When I saw the article, my reaction was "hey, thanks for letting me know what the link actually is". I was not surprised at all by it. I sort of expected it.
I assumed they did something to improve matching, but I never imagined they stored the 'raw' (as in actual voice, albeit probably compressed) recordings.
I had a suspicion when I started reading this article that the simplest solution would be to cut meat out of the diet.
It's astounding how many problems are solved medically, environmentally, economically, and of course ethically if we simply stop consuming meat, or at least stop consuming it at such extreme levels!