…that could make you smarter?
Heck, I’d be happy with the anti-aging part myself. Though I have a commenter or two that could stand to be smarter.
…that could make you smarter?
Heck, I’d be happy with the anti-aging part myself. Though I have a commenter or two that could stand to be smarter.
…and the alarmists lost.
[Update a while later]
Why is Obama getting a pass on his climate lies?
Really, at this point, why does anyone believe anything he says any more?
Apparently, carb reduction can help with GERDS.
Judith Curry has the goods on this latest bout of junk science:
My main conclusion from reading the report is this: the phrase ‘climate change’ is now officially meaningless. The report effectively implies that there is no climate change other than what is caused by humans, and that extreme weather events are equivalent to climate change. Any increase in adverse impacts from extreme weather events or sea level rise is caused by humans. Possible scenarios of future climate change depend only on emissions scenarios that are translated into warming by climate models that produce far more warming than has recently been observed.
Roger Pielke approves.
Have they really found a cure?
…the developments at Penn point, tantalizingly, to something more, something that would rank among the great milestones in the history of mankind: a true cure. Of 25 children and 5 adults with Emily’s disease, ALL, 27 had a complete remission, in which cancer becomes undetectable.“
It’s a stunning breakthrough,” says Sally Church, of drug development advisor Icarus Consultants. Says Crystal Mackall, who is developing similar treatments at the National Cancer Institute: “It really is a revolution. This is going to open the door for all sorts of cell-based and gene therapy for all kinds of disease because it’s going to demonstrate that it’s economically viable.”
Also:
“I’ve told the team that resources are not an issue. Speed is the issue,” says Novartis Chief Executive Joseph Jimenez, 54. “I want to hear what it takes to run this phase III trial and to get this to market. You’re talking about patients who are about to die. The pain of having to turn patients away is such that we are going as fast as we can and not letting resources get in the way.”
Yes. Faster please.
In his inimitable way, Mark Steyn explains:
The way the DC “legislature” wrote the Anti-SLAPP law it’s unclear whether a denial of an anti-SLAPP motion is appealable. So my co-defendants would like the Court of Appeals to rule on the question. They could have ruled on it way back last autumn when the denial of the motion to dismiss the original complaint was appealed, but by then Michael E Mann, whose original complaint was as poorly constructed as his hockey stick, had filed his amended complaint, so the Court of Appeals ruled that it was moot. If you’re wondering what “it” is in that last clause, “it” is any combination of: a) the original complaint; b) the original motion to dismiss the original complaint; c) the original denial of the original motion to dismiss the original complaint; d) the original appeal of the original denial of the original motion to dismiss the original complaint; e) the original appeal of whether the original appeal of the original denial of the original motion to dismiss the original complaint is appealable; or f) a gluten-free chia-seed bagel three days past its sell-by date left under the judges’ desk.
Or something.
I’ve been taking an 81 mg dose for heart-attack/stroke prevention, but maybe I shouldn’t be.
And how did they come up with 81 for the dosage? Why not a round number?
“Robert Heinlein, call your office.”
Would that he could. I wonder if it would be possible to get the same effect with stem cells from your own body?
Another victory for low carb, high fat.
That Eisenhower anecdote is sad. Nina Teicholz’s new book looks interesting, too:
The fact is, there has never been solid evidence for the idea that these fats cause disease. We only believe this to be the case because nutrition policy has been derailed over the past half-century by a mixture of personal ambition, bad science, politics and bias.
Gee, sort of like climate “science.”
[Sunday afternoon update]
How the war against saturated fat created carb overload, obesity and heart disease:
…there was no turning back: Too much institutional energy and research money had already been spent trying to prove Dr. Keys’s hypothesis. A bias in its favor had grown so strong that the idea just started to seem like common sense. As Harvard nutrition professor Mark Hegsted said in 1977, after successfully persuading the U.S. Senate to recommend Dr. Keys’s diet for the entire nation, the question wasn’t whether Americans should change their diets, but why not? Important benefits could be expected, he argued. And the risks? “None can be identified,” he said.
In fact, even back then, other scientists were warning about the diet’s potential unintended consequences. Today, we are dealing with the reality that these have come to pass.
One consequence is that in cutting back on fats, we are now eating a lot more carbohydrates—at least 25% more since the early 1970s. Consumption of saturated fat, meanwhile, has dropped by 11%, according to the best available government data. Translation: Instead of meat, eggs and cheese, we’re eating more pasta, grains, fruit and starchy vegetables such as potatoes. Even seemingly healthy low-fat foods, such as yogurt, are stealth carb-delivery systems, since removing the fat often requires the addition of fillers to make up for lost texture—and these are usually carbohydrate-based.
The problem is that carbohydrates break down into glucose, which causes the body to release insulin—a hormone that is fantastically efficient at storing fat. Meanwhile, fructose, the main sugar in fruit, causes the liver to generate triglycerides and other lipids in the blood that are altogether bad news. Excessive carbohydrates lead not only to obesity but also, over time, to Type 2 diabetes and, very likely, heart disease.
First emphasis mine. In that, it has much in common with climate “science.”
And as I’ve often noted, my father was a fatal casualty of that war, back in the late seventies.
[Update a few minutes later]
One other point, that I’d never considered before. The American Heart Association is probably responsible for more heart disease and cardiac (and stroke) fatalities than any other organization.
The DC Court of Appeals hasn’t dismissed, but it has agreed to hear our arguments on the merits of dismissal. This is potentially good news for the First Amendment.