Author Topic: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....  (Read 14294 times)

Offline Shawn Meilicke

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1365
  • Karma: +13/-5
  • Parkour: my anti-drug
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #40 on: April 28, 2009, 02:16:53 PM »
i looked up that disease with the first thing saying this:

Old term for a syndrome of supposed enlargement of the thymus and lymph nodes in infants and young children, formerly believed to be associated with unexplained sudden death; it was also erroneously believed that pressure of the thymus on the trachea might cause death during anaesthesia. Prominence of these structures is now considered normal in young children, including those who have died suddenly without preceding illnesses that might lead to atrophy of lymphoid tissue.

then it said its now synonymous with SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome)

just thought id put that here so other dont need to look it up
"Though all the world may hate us, we are named.
The shadow overtake us, we are known
We're more than carbon and chemicals
Free will is ours and we can't let go
We are the image of the invisible"
-Thrice


1+1=10

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #41 on: April 28, 2009, 02:20:25 PM »
Sort of.  SIDS still exists.  Thymicolymphaticus does not exist in medicine anymore thus is "Old World" because it was a disease of enlarged thymus glands that is not really pathological...but was thought to be based on the science of the time.

Offline Shawn Meilicke

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1365
  • Karma: +13/-5
  • Parkour: my anti-drug
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #42 on: April 28, 2009, 02:24:16 PM »
and thats why i never believe the internet, lmao

i guess it was still kinda right though

plus one for knida relevant for "mondofacto.com" lol
(i have firefox, when you put a word into the address bar it brings up a "good article" or will go to your default search engine...this time it brought that up)
"Though all the world may hate us, we are named.
The shadow overtake us, we are known
We're more than carbon and chemicals
Free will is ours and we can't let go
We are the image of the invisible"
-Thrice


1+1=10

Offline tombb

  • Mangabey
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Karma: +60/-34
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #43 on: April 28, 2009, 02:36:04 PM »
I don't really have a place here -- and i don't really want one...

Your disagreements are mostly philosophical in nature so I don't really understand the point in continuing this, but thats not up to me...

With that said, I just want to point out this statement:

Science generally doesn't flipflops because it's not what draws premature definitive conclusions (ecept social science studies and population correlations I guess, but those should really come with a disclaimer anyways), it's often that all direct lab evidence and studies are accurate but they are sometimes taken out of context or not understood in terms of how they really relate to the actual big picture and practical reality.

That's not really true.  Sure, conclusions are drawn and often times they are right -- but to say that a conclusion is always right is a dangerous road to run down...

I suggest you look up the details of a "disease" called thymicolymphaticus...this is a great example of the shortcoming of the scientific method and jumping to conclusions about "fact" and "truth" as supported by data.  Data is great but a tool in the toolbox - not the end all of understanding.  There is always the nagging chance that a variable was overlooked...in the case of thymicolymphaticus it was poverty...

It may be enlightening to read an essay titled "Poverty's Remains" by Dr. Robert Sapolsky, Ph. D.
Actually, that is a clear example of my point, that science doesn't flip-flop on scientific tests. The problem in there again is that that again was a social study and population correlation.  An example of scientific test on it would have been to actually cause the condition in mice and then cure it with the information suggested by the current theory. That has been done for many things (for example when Africa didn't believe that AIDS was really a virus, with the famous clear-cut sequence of infecting an animal, extracting the agent from it passed through a microscopic filter and then showing filter size allowing or preventing next infection, plus now we can do other things like directly inhibiting or affecting the virus).

Again, scientific data does not change and there is no flip-flopping, only increasingly more refined and precise explanations and methods that still explain equally well ALL previous data. 
You only get the impression that things flip-flop when science and guessing get confused.  Epidemiology and surveys can still be ~scientific data but not to draw definitive conclusions, only to form useful initial guesses that can then be really tested with actual experiments and tests, not just statistics.  Any data from proper testing will still have to be explained by the correct theory, no flip-flopping about that, as any valid experiment is repeatable and will always give the same result each time under the same conditions.

It's like for diets, every person responds exactly the same way to it, when you factor in all the relevant parameters, like genetics, hormonal state, number of fat cells and muscle cells, etc. You could say "everybody is different so you can never predict things", but that's just false, everybody is the same once you know all the parameters, we all have the same basic biochemistry and spectrum of mutations and variables, and we can always predict things like "when you consume less than you burn, you will either lose weight or your body will try to adjust the amount you burn or the amount you consume, and we can predict which of the 3 will occur and in which order and amounts various hormones and other body responses will occur".

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #44 on: April 30, 2009, 06:28:29 AM »
Ehhh, i still disagree but won't go into a lengthy diatribe.

Just a short example:
We consistently tell people they should consume higher carb PWO because of better results as shown through studies X Y and Z.  What if X Y and Z only apply to peoploe between 15 and 30?  This is a common counfounding variable that is overlooked.  What is X Y and Z cover something else about human physiology all together -- maybe there is another neuropeptide or hormone or factor that comes into play within that window that can, for some reason, negate the benefits of sugars PWO.

To say anything with any degree of certainty is dangerous and always will be....

Scientific facts can't flip flop - of course not...but data is always wildly misconstrued even when we don't realize it.  Just look at the effects of testosterone...widely accepted to increase aggression but the mechanisms are subtle.  Science takes time (millenia we still havent even begun to invest in, yet) and saying it doesn't flip flop JUST because the very basic elements of basic science are proven is a dangerous pit to fall into, imho.

Offline tombb

  • Mangabey
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Karma: +60/-34
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #45 on: April 30, 2009, 03:45:26 PM »
Ehhh, i still disagree but won't go into a lengthy diatribe.

Just a short example:
We consistently tell people they should consume higher carb PWO because of better results as shown through studies X Y and Z.  What if X Y and Z only apply to peoploe between 15 and 30?  This is a common counfounding variable that is overlooked.  What is X Y and Z cover something else about human physiology all together -- maybe there is another neuropeptide or hormone or factor that comes into play within that window that can, for some reason, negate the benefits of sugars PWO.

To say anything with any degree of certainty is dangerous and always will be....

Scientific facts can't flip flop - of course not...but data is always wildly misconstrued even when we don't realize it.  Just look at the effects of testosterone...widely accepted to increase aggression but the mechanisms are subtle.  Science takes time (millenia we still havent even begun to invest in, yet) and saying it doesn't flip flop JUST because the very basic elements of basic science are proven is a dangerous pit to fall into, imho.
That's not how it works. Science proceeds in incremental steps, starting from the knowledge that covers more cases and then  further handling smaller less common situations, without ever flip-flopping.

Actual examples in science show how you can improve your knowledge and science/technology itself without changing or negating  previous results and solid conclusions.

Remaining inconclusive and saying who knows, everything is possible, is much worse than saying things that are fairly certain with certainty.
If you understand gravity, physics and solid objects, and you crashed into walls before you really should have a very good reason to think the next time you walk into a wall you might walk through it like a ghost.

A simple theory of gravity works and will -always- work for most situations with enough accuracy even without thinking about  black holes and bent spacetime. Science doesn't make unnecessary inferences, and as soon as you find situations that need  further explanation you improve things accordingly.

You can have an elementary understanding of electricity and design things with it even without quantum mechanics, like light  bulbs. If later on learn enough quantum electronics to be able to design DVD readers, computer memory etc, that will not  suddenly cause all lightbulbs in the world to stop working.
Or think of the difference between newtonian physics and relativity.  Obviously newtonian physics is technically incorrect, as  the results derived from it start to divert ever so slightly as you get closer to light speed and planetary masses. But it's  still close enough that everybody still uses it today even to build all sorts of things.

Plus really the rate of scientific progress in most fields is way higher than the millenia you mentioned, more like huge  advances every 10 or so years.  Just look at the progress of genetics, solid-state electronics, etc. We are talking about huge  increases in the amount of knowledge in less than 10 years (e.g., complete mapping of all genes for so many organisms where just  20 years earlier you could barely look at small pieces of DNA at a time).


Using your example, you could later find out that all the current physiology knowledge we have works between 1 and 80 years old  except for when you are exactly 37 or something weird like that (although again when you think at what mechanisms would cause  that, you should know it's not very likely). Yet unless you were exactly 37, you would still benefit from all the existing  knowledge.  Either way, if the effect is real and repeatable it's probably not hard to diagnose and understand exceptions when they actually happen, and account for them.
Specifically, PWO carb/protein intake HAS been tested with similar results on older people (a lot of tests are done on old people because exercise and nutrition are important ways to prevent osteoporosis etc).


The main point is that scientists are very clear about never confusing opinions and well-established facts and theories. That's why you have scientific journals like "current opinions in physiology/anything" to allow you to discuss possibilities and  theories that have not been conclusively been backed up by results and that might still be completely disproven as people try to  actually compare them.  In fact that's the main job for scientists, to find areas with open or unanswered questions.

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #46 on: April 30, 2009, 06:24:26 PM »
Only skimmed but there are some problems with this whole discussion.

First off, we agree on most things and our only disagreement is one of philosophy.  Beliefs are much harder to changed than ideas...

Secondly, we are using two different definitions of science so this debate is apples-to-oranges. 

The definition I have been using:
"Science" - The scientific community and how it makes a good attempt to use and interpret data that is collected in experimental studies.

The definition you have been using:
"Science" - A collection of facts that are found through experimental methods and procedures.

Offline tombb

  • Mangabey
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Karma: +60/-34
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #47 on: April 30, 2009, 11:22:33 PM »
Only skimmed but there are some problems with this whole discussion.

First off, we agree on most things and our only disagreement is one of philosophy.  Beliefs are much harder to changed than ideas...

Secondly, we are using two different definitions of science so this debate is apples-to-oranges. 

The definition I have been using:
"Science" - The scientific community and how it makes a good attempt to use and interpret data that is collected in experimental studies.

The definition you have been using:
"Science" - A collection of facts that are found through experimental methods and procedures.
Chris, I concur,
but my main point is that even in your definition of "Science", the scientific community keeps very aware of the difference between what are temporary conjectures or standing opinions that are not fully tested, versus which aspects are fully supported and unlikely to change. We know what needs further testing, which tests would be required to conclusively prove it, and what evidence we currently have to base our decisions on.

It's usually only when it gets reported in non-scientific channels (media, politics, doctors trying to unnecessarily dumb-down things for patients or hype things for books they want to sell) that all the proper disclaimers and information about what we know for sure and what is still under investigation gets discarded.


This started from my suggestion that if Charles was interested in it he could start a thread looking at scientific data on sweeteners and that if he did I would help contribute in the discussion. 

My point there was that we would be looking at actual studies and results, not popular standing opinions, political committee decisions, or anti-industry hippie movements. In that context we would be under the definition of science that I used, and there would be no flip-flopping involved.
Each study would be another piece of the puzzle, any shortcoming of one study might be controlled for by some other study until either you reasonably covered all your bases -OR- you would know better which situation or detail is still unknown, which study would be needed to resolve it, and what is and isn't likely and how risks compare to other reasonable risks (there are risks and side-effects in everything, even water or vitamins, so it's important to put things into context, and also consider doses, alternatives, options etc).

MeKa360

  • Guest
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #48 on: May 01, 2009, 04:23:55 AM »
i stopped drinking soda long time ago

only powerade, milk, and water

Offline KC Parsons

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1414
  • Karma: +82/-13
    • View Profile
    • Eat. Move. Improve.
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #49 on: May 01, 2009, 06:26:19 AM »
i stopped drinking soda long time ago

only powerade, milk, and water

Good stuff, it's always good to hear of someone who's been able to overcome the allure of those carbonated devils (I myself have problems time to time).

Next on the list:
Eliminate the powerade, add green tea :D

Offline BearMills

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1135
  • Karma: +30/-2
  • Grizzly
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #50 on: May 01, 2009, 07:01:56 AM »
Yeah Im addicted to soft drinks i always drank coca cola when i was little but finally my dad said you need to start drinking Diet so I started drinking diet and now i cant drink normal coca cola because it is T00 sugary and is disgusting... I am trying to break the habit i usually have around 2 cans a week... but normally 1....
Co-Founder

Offline Shawn Meilicke

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1365
  • Karma: +13/-5
  • Parkour: my anti-drug
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #51 on: May 01, 2009, 03:34:06 PM »
you know whats depressing, my step mom is a nurse

she drinks coca-cola like its water. and when my little (half) sister was a baby, she put coke in her BOTTLES!!!

parenting fail?!
"Though all the world may hate us, we are named.
The shadow overtake us, we are known
We're more than carbon and chemicals
Free will is ours and we can't let go
We are the image of the invisible"
-Thrice


1+1=10

Offline edgey

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
  • Karma: +12/-8
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #52 on: May 01, 2009, 05:12:37 PM »
Been soda free for 1 year and proud to be!

Though I have been thinking about on occasion having fresca, only on special occasions though

Offline Charles Moreland

  • Global Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1095
  • Karma: +225/-24
    • View Profile
    • www.charlesmoreland.com
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #53 on: May 01, 2009, 08:48:26 PM »
This started from my suggestion that if Charles was interested in it he could start a thread looking at scientific data on sweeteners and that if he did I would help contribute in the discussion. 

Tom, I mean this with all respect, but I don't believe I've ever seen a thread started by you. In fact, for a good many pages, almost all of your recent responses are some form of critique. I don't imply this to be wrong in anyway, but if you think that a thread on (artificial) sweeteners would be beneficial, perhaps you should be the one to start it?

If you have all this knowledge, why wait for someone else to ask the question?

Offline swap01

  • Patas
  • ***
  • Posts: 130
  • Karma: +5/-9
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #54 on: May 01, 2009, 09:01:34 PM »
Doesn't diet soda contain similar products to aspartame, that have the same effects?

Offline tombb

  • Mangabey
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Karma: +60/-34
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #55 on: May 01, 2009, 09:39:18 PM »
This started from my suggestion that if Charles was interested in it he could start a thread looking at scientific data on sweeteners and that if he did I would help contribute in the discussion. 

Tom, I mean this with all respect, but I don't believe I've ever seen a thread started by you. In fact, for a good many pages, almost all of your recent responses are some form of critique. I don't imply this to be wrong in anyway, but if you think that a thread on (artificial) sweeteners would be beneficial, perhaps you should be the one to start it?

If you have all this knowledge, why wait for someone else to ask the question?
Charles, it's because if people already state something correctly, or if I already think their point are valid and I agree with them, then it seems unnecessary for me to post just to say "I agree", unless maybe they forgot to mention some useful detail and I feel I can contribute by adding that.  I think that's a reasonable way to go about it.

It's usually only when I see something that I think is incomplete or largely incorrect that I actually post, especially when I think that someone might genuinely want to know if they missed some important detail in their thinking or misunderstood something, like I did with things like milk for PKChiro or metabolic pathways for Chris, etc.

For things that seem to be popular myths and largely incorrect, like the way this thread started, I would hope someone else would intervene and set people straight (look how many people still only read the first post and just end up believing those crazy statements about soda being like heroin etc, I don't think you really want people to believe that nonsense).
But if nobody steps in to fix it (maybe because they think "hey, soda is not completely healthy anyways so it's ok to let people believe outrageous myths") then I sometimes post to fix those too (just like I did for things like HFCS or things like getting indigestion from eating more carbs than they are used to etc).

As far as making a post about sweeteners, I don't have much of a reason to start a topic, I don't think they are particularly bad in moderation and I think that's the conclusion everybody should derive from all the evidence.

It's the same reason why I didn't make a post saying overeating in general is the problem and there's nothing especially bad about McDonalds, and the same reason why I didn't start a post about "Tap water is ok and often better than bottled" but I showed that's the case with data and studies when people claimed the opposite, etc. 
Those are all the same conclusions I would expect everybody to reach and I normally imagine most people know already.

I suggested you should post just because it almost sounded like you thought differently and I would expect you would have a specific reason or study in mind that convinced you. 

MeKa360

  • Guest
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #56 on: May 02, 2009, 10:13:25 AM »
i stopped drinking soda long time ago

only powerade, milk, and water

Good stuff, it's always good to hear of someone who's been able to overcome the allure of those carbonated devils (I myself have problems time to time).

Next on the list:
Eliminate the powerade, add green tea :D

chill dude...

powerade  and determination is wat keeps me going.
i can never leave that drink   :P

Offline KC Parsons

  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 1414
  • Karma: +82/-13
    • View Profile
    • Eat. Move. Improve.
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #57 on: May 02, 2009, 11:46:40 AM »
i stopped drinking soda long time ago

only powerade, milk, and water

Good stuff, it's always good to hear of someone who's been able to overcome the allure of those carbonated devils (I myself have problems time to time).

Next on the list:
Eliminate the powerade, add green tea :D

chill dude...

powerade  and determination is wat keeps me going.
i can never leave that drink   :P

Sure ya can. The fact that you feel like you need it should be a reason in itself to stop drinking it. :P

Offline Chris Salvato

  • Moderator
  • Hirundo Rustica
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
  • Karma: +327/-64
  • Eat. Move. Improve.
    • View Profile
    • Chris Salvato
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #58 on: May 02, 2009, 02:11:00 PM »
i stopped drinking soda long time ago

only powerade, milk, and water

Good stuff, it's always good to hear of someone who's been able to overcome the allure of those carbonated devils (I myself have problems time to time).

Next on the list:
Eliminate the powerade, add green tea :D

chill dude...

powerade  and determination is wat keeps me going.
i can never leave that drink   :P

Sure ya can. The fact that you feel like you need it should be a reason in itself to stop drinking it. :P

I agree.

There is nothing to powerade aside from sugar and some electrolytes.  The fact that you feel you "need" something that is not a necessity for life is a sure sign that something needs to be changed.

Offline tombb

  • Mangabey
  • ****
  • Posts: 476
  • Karma: +60/-34
    • View Profile
Re: For those of you that still drink soft drinks....
« Reply #59 on: May 02, 2009, 03:02:22 PM »
i stopped drinking soda long time ago

only powerade, milk, and water

Good stuff, it's always good to hear of someone who's been able to overcome the allure of those carbonated devils (I myself have problems time to time).

Next on the list:
Eliminate the powerade, add green tea :D

chill dude...

powerade  and determination is wat keeps me going.
i can never leave that drink   :P

Sure ya can. The fact that you feel like you need it should be a reason in itself to stop drinking it. :P

I agree.

There is nothing to powerade aside from sugar and some electrolytes.  The fact that you feel you "need" something that is not a necessity for life is a sure sign that something needs to be changed.

I wouldn't say that.

Aside from the fact that both sodas and something like powerade are ok in moderation, as they are both just water with some unnecessary sugar and in the case of powerade sugar and salt, I would assume he's drinking the powerade during/after workouts (since I think that's the point of that drink).

In that case, the sugar, salt and water are pretty much exactly what is best for his body at that point, and there is no risk of over-consuming it (unless he trained too often, and even then the sugar would just refill his depleted muscle energy stores and the salt and water would help restore what he sweated out).

He could do even better if he added also some fast-absorbing proteins and vitamins to the sugar, salt, water too after his workouts, but it sounds like he really enjoys that taste of that drink and it helps him stay motivated so good for him.

Plus it's just a wrong inference to say if you enjoy something and consume it on a regular basis you are addicted to it. That's just nonsense. I mean, there are people that are more predisposed to addictions, sure, and we all can occasionally pick up a few bad habits or get carried away, but if you said "I always enjoy drinking fresh water during workouts" that doesn't make you a water-addict or workout-addict. Same for "I like to have a nutritious meal after working out", or "My favorite breakfast starts with milk". It's only bad if it was not in moderation, if it was bad for him (which we already clearly established is not the case, again in moderation and at the right times), or if it interfered in other negative ways in his life.