The Nova classification system isn't based on the number of processing steps, it's based on ingredients.
Putting a loaf of bread into a bag certainly doesn't move it from the minimally processed to the ultra-processed category. That false claim is based on the fact that most bread sold in bags is ultra-processed, but it's not the bag that makes it so.
I think that professor of food engineering may have a conflict of interest related to the foods he creates for a living.
The current healthcare system was mostly shaped by Democrats with the Affordable Care Act (sometimes called Obamacare) at a time when Democrats held a filibuster proof majority.
As evidence for mortality related to saturated fat, that AHA statement cites only three sources.
First, in the Oslo Diet-Heart Study, "there were fewer cardiovascular deaths in the experimental group by 27% (P=0.09)", a non-significant result.
Second, it cites the reduction in CHD deaths in Finland between 1972 and 1992, attributing 50% of the reduction to cholesterol levels. But similar reductions occurred in many nations at that time, largely due to reduced smoking, improved treatment, and other changes that should not be ignored. There is no clear link to saturated fat here.
Third, it cites the Nurses’ Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study, an observational study that didn't isolate PUFA intake, and is likely to be confounded by diet quality.
I would describe that evidence as weak-to-moderate at best.
The evidence regarding LDL is stronger, but that's a concern that should be measured and treated individually. People do not respond identically to diet, not everyone has high LDL, and there are many ways to lower it if needed. Personally, I don't worry much about saturated fat because my LDL is under 70.
> Replacing "seed oils" with hamburgers and french fries fried in tallow won't magically help your health. If anything, you would die quicker from the huge amount of saturated fat you're now intaking.
I'd like to see your evidence for the first claim.
The second claim is not as well supported as you might think. A recent Cochrane review published by The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) rated "Reduction in Saturated Fat Intake for Cardiovascular Disease" as having Unclear Benefits with no significant effect on all-cause or cardiovascular mortality. This is based on randomized controlled trials that measured endpoints directly rather than LDL levels.
> It's ironic you cite ultra-processed foods, another category which has questionable rigor and applicability, but people nonetheless defend because "Even if ultra processed foods themselves aren't harmful, avoiding them is likely to be beneficial because it leads to avoiding unhealthy foods."
The evidence that ultra processed foods are harmful is quite strong, much stronger than the association with saturated fat intake. Are you really suggesting that they might not be unhealthy?
> I don’t see any way to get to this conclusion other than heavily filtering the evidence—ignoring the flaws in everything that supports a predetermined view while scrambling to find flaws in everything that contradicts it.
Is that not what he's doing when he dismisses the evidence that contradicts his view?
Among other mechanisms, refining removes nutrients and other beneficial molecules, while purifying taste and reducing volume making it easier to overeat.
But the worst part isn't refining the oil itself, but the use of these oils in ultra-processed foods along with refined sweeteners, colorings, and fillers. Even if refined seed oils themselves aren't harmful, avoiding them is likely to be beneficial because it leads to avoiding ultra-processed foods.
> They don't think the wealth and lifestyles they enjoy have anything to do with the US' status as a global hegemon.
> The people who hold these views are overwhelmingly not members of the working class. They're retirees or Gen-Xers coming off their peak earning years.
That implies young working class people think their lives would be worse if America does not remain a global hegemon.
I'd love to see your sources for that claim. That is not my impression. I have seen little if any support for American hegemony among the young.
> Some even think the relationship is inverted, believing that as the world de-Americanizes, Americans will somehow benefit from this.
That may well be true of the working class, who receive nothing from the foreign income multinational corporations earn but face more competition to buy housing from the people who do receive a share, and more competition for jobs from foreigners (both immigration and globalization).
> defense is harder for LLMs than offense. They struggle mightily when pulling together too many threads, and some projects are just too big.
Defense doesn't have to be part of code gen. Any automated attacker (like LLMs) could be used for defense simply by finding exploits, then fixing them by whatever means. People choose not to invest in that.
I used to have an open mind about this myself, until I saw the other side of healthcare.
Even with the lockdowns, Covid nearly overwhelmed the healthcare system in America. It led to a massive nursing shortage as nurses quit. The system could not have handled more cases appearing faster.
> What I’d like to get answers to is why if everyone says about shortages of nurses, doctors, teachers, plumbers and other handymen, highly qualified engineers capable of making some complex stuff like rockets; I don’t really see any policy makers pushing to make such jobs more appealing, I don’t see people around talking about moving to any of such areas even if they struggle or lose their office/corporate jobs, or talking about their kids learning to do one of them
I believe that the people in charge don't want to improve working conditions, but in fact want to increase hours, lower pay, and deregulate. So they complain about shortages (without mentioning "of people willing to accept those conditions") and push to lower standards.
And unfortunately they are able to get major media outlets to publish that message without questioning it.
(Also, there was a genuine nursing shortage for a while after Covid, because conditions were so bad a lot of people left the profession. People may still talk about that even though it has resolved now.)
What do you mean? Don't they benefit from Sweden's generous educational and welfare systems in addition to extra support for migrants?