General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Let's Accept That Our Knowledge Is Incomplete

Started by Visual Purple · · Last activity · 8 posts · 312 views

← Back to General fitness, health and nutrition

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postLet's Accept That Our Knowledge Is IncompleteVisual Purple · 8 Aug 2005 02 / This pagePosts 1–8Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #8MMu · 9 Aug 2005

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
8 August 2005
Last activity
9 August 2005
Original author
Visual Purple
Posts
8
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
312
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–8 of 8
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Original post
    Visual Purple
    Archived post
    #1

    Our knowledge of nutrition and health is necessarily incomplete. We
    are learning. We are evolving.

    None of the systems of health are going to encompass all of the
    minutiae of health. We should not expect them too.

    I do not understand why instead of pooling our knowledge and
    supplementing one another's knowledge there is so much trying to
    discredit the next one because they do not know everything. How silly!

    I follow Natural Hygiene in a modified way. I do not accept all of the
    principles and I do not practice all of the principles that I do accept
    because I am Human and make "terrible mistakes" like have slice of
    pizza sometimes. You know what? So does everyone who follows Natural
    Hygiene.

    I allow for the fact that others can provide information that I do not
    have. In fact, that is why I came here.

    The spirit of discrediting people here in toto because they cannot
    present a perfect system is unrealistic.

    Expecting perfection is a form of abuse. Learning does not occur in an
    atmosphere of abuse.

    Let's start playing nice and some real learning may start to occur
    here.

    Unless, of course, there are those here whose vested interest it is
    that learning will not occur.

    VP

    Report
  2. montygram
    Archived post
    #2

    This is why a better understanding of what "science" actually is can be
    helpful. At present, there is no general theory of health as is there
    is a general theory of relativity, for example. As I've tried to show
    many times, there is overwhelming evidence to support the Harman
    hypothesis at this point in time (free radical damage). I will be the
    first to add that it's important to make sure you have enough
    nutrients, and in the correct form. However, there are some claims
    about "essential" nutrients that not only contradict the oxidative
    stress hypothesis of chronic disease causation, but also do not have
    real scientific evidence to support them. The "essential fatty acid"
    claim might be the most egregious instance of this, because the one
    experiment used to support it was done in 1930, before all the vitamins
    were known, and without proper controls. In that experiment, the
    different kinds of polyunsaturates were not tested, yet today we are
    told that omega 3 and 6 PUFAs are "essential," when the original
    experiment (which nobody has bothered to repeat and do correctly) did
    not test to see if the omega 9 derived PUFAs could do the same as the
    others, only more safely. I have examined the studies that have been
    conducted, and it is clear that this highly likely to be the case.

    If you, or anyone else, needs help understanding something or needs
    citations from the literature, you can always just ask me. Try doing
    your own research first, for example on pubmed.com, because the best
    way to really understand something is to work through it yourself.
    Fortunately, I have been aided by excellent mentors, and so am trying
    to return the favor by posting here.

    Report
  3. montygram
    Archived post
    #3

    This is why a better understanding of what "science" actually is can be
    helpful. At present, there is no general theory of health as is there
    is a general theory of relativity, for example. As I've tried to show
    many times, there is overwhelming evidence to support the Harman
    hypothesis at this point in time (free radical damage). I will be the
    first to add that it's important to make sure you have enough
    nutrients, and in the correct form. However, there are some claims
    about "essential" nutrients that not only contradict the oxidative
    stress hypothesis of chronic disease causation, but also do not have
    real scientific evidence to support them. The "essential fatty acid"
    claim might be the most egregious instance of this, because the one
    experiment used to support it was done in 1930, before all the vitamins
    were known, and without proper controls. In that experiment, the
    different kinds of polyunsaturates were not tested, yet today we are
    told that omega 3 and 6 PUFAs are "essential," when the original
    experiment (which nobody has bothered to repeat and do correctly) did
    not test to see if the omega 9 derived PUFAs could do the same as the
    others, only more safely. I have examined the studies that have been
    conducted, and it is clear that this highly likely to be the case.

    If you, or anyone else, needs help understanding something or needs
    citations from the literature, you can always just ask me. Try doing
    your own research first, for example on pubmed.com, because the best
    way to really understand something is to work through it yourself.
    Fortunately, I have been aided by excellent mentors, and so am trying
    to return the favor by posting here.

    Report
  4. MMu
    Archived post
    #4

    "montygram" <[email hidden]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    This is why a better understanding of what "science" actually is can be
    helpful. At present, there is no general theory of health as is there
    is a general theory of relativity, for example.

    what an amazingly pointless comparison.

    Quoted message said:

    As I've tried to show
    many times, there is overwhelming evidence to support the Harman
    hypothesis at this point in time (free radical damage). I will be the
    first to add that it's important to make sure you have enough
    nutrients, and in the correct form. However, there are some claims
    about "essential" nutrients that not only contradict the oxidative
    stress hypothesis of chronic disease causation, but also do not have
    real scientific evidence to support them. The "essential fatty acid"
    claim might be the most egregious instance of this, because the one
    experiment used to support it was done in 1930, before all the vitamins
    were known, and without proper controls. In that experiment, the
    different kinds of polyunsaturates were not tested, yet today we are
    told that omega 3 and 6 PUFAs are "essential," when the original
    experiment (which nobody has bothered to repeat and do correctly) did
    not test to see if the omega 9 derived PUFAs could do the same as the
    others, only more safely. I have examined the studies that have been
    conducted, and it is clear that this highly likely to be the case.

    This is only because all the literature on w3's you read IS from 1930.
    There have been plenty of great studies on the essentiality of w3 fatty
    acids since, and people posted them numerous times- you just play blind and
    deaf.. thats all.

    Quoted message said:

    If you, or anyone else, needs help understanding something or needs
    citations from the literature, you can always just ask me. Try doing
    your own research first, for example on pubmed.com, because the best
    way to really understand something is to work through it yourself.
    Fortunately, I have been aided by excellent mentors, and so am trying
    to return the favor by posting here.

    there we again have the mysterious "mentors".. better not mention a name,
    otherwise people would know that you make something like ("I read a
    newsletter by Ray Peat"😉 sound like you went to his house to take lectures
    every day.

    Report
  5. Visual Purple
    Archived post
    #5

    Monte,

    Sharing knowledge is a form of intimacy. When you try to force what
    you think you know on another you are engaging in the equivalent of
    sexual harrassment on the mental plane.

    Just state your case as well, respectfully and as modestly, as you can.
    That's all you can do. The rest is up to the next one to respond or
    not to.

    VP

    Report
  6. Visual Purple
    Archived post
    #6

    "what an amazingly pointless comparison.", MMu says glibly and probably
    with little understanding of either Relativity or Nutrition.

    I thought it a rather good comparison, particularly since I know that
    the Theory of Relativity will be supplanted with a theory more exacting
    one day, even as Relativity is more exacting than Newton's theory of
    gravitation and so supplanted it. Relativity is the darling of the
    day. Such is the case with all scientific theories. They come and go,
    much like fashion models.

    The principles of health that work work in every generation and are not
    supplanted. That is the difference between truth and theory.

    While I do not thumb my nose at science, having been a student of
    physics I know its limitations all too well.

    Report
  7. Visual Purple
    Archived post
    #7

    "what an amazingly pointless comparison.", MMu says glibly and probably
    with little understanding of either Relativity or Nutrition.

    I thought it a rather good comparison, particularly since I know that
    the Theory of Relativity will be supplanted with a theory more exacting
    one day, even as Relativity is more exacting than Newton's theory of
    gravitation and so supplanted it. Relativity is the darling of the
    day. Such is the case with all scientific theories. They come and go,
    much like fashion models.

    The principles of health that work work in every generation and are not
    supplanted. That is the difference between truth and theory.

    While I do not thumb my nose at science, having been a student of
    physics I know its limitations all too well.

    Report
  8. MMu
    Archived post
    #8

    "Visual Purple" <[email hidden]> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    "what an amazingly pointless comparison.", MMu says glibly and probably
    with little understanding of either Relativity or Nutrition.

    I thought it a rather good comparison, particularly since I know that
    the Theory of Relativity will be supplanted with a theory more exacting
    one day, even as Relativity is more exacting than Newton's theory of
    gravitation and so supplanted it. Relativity is the darling of the
    day. Such is the case with all scientific theories. They come and go,
    much like fashion models.

    The general theory of relativity is a mathematical model, come up by one
    person (more or less), spawned out of a small ammount of published
    experimental data (and the special theory of relativity).

    The "general theory of health" is (or rather would be) a multi-disciplinary
    mixture of physiology, biochemistry, nutrition, epidemiology, sociology,
    psychology and many more, worked on by thousands of people with myriads of
    experiments.

    If you think the complexity levels of these is pretty much the same, great..
    you'd better stick to physics then though.

    Quoted message said:

    The principles of health that work work in every generation and are not
    supplanted. That is the difference between truth and theory.

    While I do not thumb my nose at science, having been a student of
    physics I know its limitations all too well.

    Report

Keep exploring

Browse the sectionGeneral fitness, health and nutrition Return to CyclingForumsStart at the home page Search discussionsFind another thread

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.