[split] Chippy vs the World
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-11-2013, 08:14 AM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
Chippy - the order of words is integral to the understanding of them. You didn't say college of gastroenterology. You said gastroenterology college.

Ex: a rare steak
Vs: a steak rare
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 08:30 AM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA)
The Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) are quantities of nutrients in the diet that are required to maintain good health in people. RDAs are established by the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Sciences, and may be revised every few years. A separate RDA value exists for each nutrient. The RDA values refer to the amount of nutrient expected to maintain good health in people. The actual amounts of each nutrient required to maintain good health in specific individuals differ from person to person.

Chippy - to maintain good health, in other words the person is healthy to begin with and it is different for everyone

recommended dietary allowance,
n a guideline developed by the National Research Council's Food and Nutrition Board to aid in adequate nutritional intake of specific vitamins and minerals. Aimed at preventing nutritional deficiencies and does not define the optimum intake levels for an individual.

Prevention, not cure.

rec·om·mend·ed di·e·tar·y al·low·ance (RDA) (rek'ŏ-mend'ĕd dī'ĕ-tar-ē ă-low'ăns)
The average daily intake of a nutrient judged sufficient to meet the requirements of most healthy people, as categorized by gender and age.


Average means some people need more and some require less.

I'm not anti-social. I'm pro-solitude. Sleepy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Anjele's post
03-11-2013, 08:54 AM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 05:49 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 05:41 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Kinda like you. Tongue

That reads two ways:

I kind of like you.
Kind of like you.

Only if one is not familiar with Blome... Dodgy

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 09:06 AM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 09:20 AM by Cathym112.)
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(02-11-2013 10:58 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(02-11-2013 10:31 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  Pick any 3 nutrients that establish the RDA for that nutrient. I'm giving you carte Blanche.

Now, this is your last chance. Ask me for anything else and it will be clear that you only have your dick in your hand

These comprehensive reviews demonstrate that not only is there no evidence that dosing above the RDA is helpful they also they suggest it may be harmful.

Meta-regression analyses, meta-analyses, and trial sequential analyses of the effects of supplementation with Beta-carotene, vitamin a, and vitamin e singly or in different combinations on all-cause mortality: do we have evidence for lack of harm?

Antioxidant supplements for prevention of mortality in healthy participants and patients with various diseases.

Those studies cover vitamins A, C and E (and more).

Please try and read the abstracts carefully and familiarise yourself with what a systematic review and meta-analysis mean and what Cochrane is. Don't come back to me with some idiotic response else I will ignore it.

There are more such authoritative systematic reviews and meta-analysis which I can provide you.

So there is good evidence that what the good doctor Fulton is advising actually increases mortality.

Further, the possible harmful effects of overdosing need to be set against the absence of any positive evidence for a therapeutic effect in overdosing.

I read the studies - not just the abstract. While the first study cited OTHER studies done with double blind, the study ITSELF is not double blind. Did you just read that abstract and hoped no one would double check you? You lost all credibility what so ever.

Your second study you cited also does not have a double blind. It's right there in the abstract..."Three authors extracted data. Random-effects and fixed-effect model meta-analyses were conducted. Risk of bias was considered in order to minimise the risk of systematic errors...."

For someone who knows so much about clinical trials, you forgot that double blind eliminates risk of bias. This study was not double blind.

You are retarded, chip. Of course - now you'll either conceded that your data is faulty, or you will say, "this changes nothing.." And dismiss your blatant error.




Everyone see that? He doesn't have a double blind study.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cathym112's post
03-11-2013, 09:39 AM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 05:49 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 05:41 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Kinda like you. Tongue

That reads two ways:

I kind of like you.
Kind of like you.

Lol!!! So the great chipster acknowledges that the order of words is intergral to the understand.


College of gastroenterology vs gastroenterology college.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 09:42 AM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(02-11-2013 11:01 PM)Chippy Wrote:  
(02-11-2013 10:37 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  HERE is your proof. Click on the link of production frontier and where does it take you? Wikipedia...

Yes and so what? I learnt about the PPF 15 years ago when I studied first-year economics. I provide links to Wikipedia as a courtesy so that if anyone doesn't understand something they can click the link.

Ok...so in one breathe you ask for evidence and claim you didn't cite Wikipedia. In the next, you say so what? Is it physically impossible for to admit when you are wrong?

"That doesn't change anything..."

Actually, it does. It shows that you frequently sidestep the point to make an unrelated tangential argument that we are attacking you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cathym112's post
03-11-2013, 10:00 AM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 01:42 PM by cheapthrillseaker.)
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 05:41 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  Kinda like you. Tongue

[Image: 12766-cm12766150075102da016gif-GXCf.gif]

EDIT: Links - they hate me. Weeping

[Image: 3d366d5c-72a0-4228-b835-f404c2970188_zps...1381867723]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cheapthrillseaker's post
03-11-2013, 10:52 AM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 11:22 AM by Stevil.)
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 05:37 AM)Chippy Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 03:29 AM)Stevil Wrote:  Provide the evidence backing your claim.
The burden of evidence always falls on the claimant.
I am so happy that we both agree.
You made the claim
Whatever benefit--if any at all--can be realised by just taking them at the RDA.

You demanded of Mark evidence in the form of double-blind placebo controlled clinical trials
Now instead of being a weasel I am again offering you an opportunity to become a man.
Provide the evidence backing your claim. (Man up!)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Stevil's post
03-11-2013, 11:47 AM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 08:14 AM)Abeautifulmind Wrote:  Chippy - the order of words is integral to the understanding of them. You didn't say college of gastroenterology. You said gastroenterology college.

Ex: a rare steak
Vs: a steak rare

I think you are being a little nitty, it was clear what he meant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 12:29 PM
RE: [split] Chippy vs the World
(03-11-2013 12:37 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 12:12 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  As I recall, only the fat soluble vitamins can cause adverse side effects, and the water soluble ones, are just excreted, when their concentration is above what is needed.

Spot-on Bucky.

Whenever we take high doses of water soluble vitamins nearly all of them pass out in the urine. This is why urine turns dark yellow or green after taking multivitamins.

So why take them? Because we're trying to correct "intra cellular" deficiencies, in other words, we're deficient inside our cells, (not in the bloodstream.) Our cell walls, made up mainly of lipids, have been hardened by the consumption of hydrogenated fats over the years. This makes them less permeable to nutrients. Hence the benefit of putting high doses of nutrients into the bloodstream; tt means that through osmosis the water soluble vitamins get through the hardened cell walls and into our cells. This is why people so often get a boost when they take high doses of vitamins... They feel better because their intra cellular deficiencies are corrected.

Incidentally, this is one of the main reasons why it's important to have high doses of Omega threes in our diet; they replace the hydrogenated facts or trans fatty acids in our cell walls yet.

The recommended daily allowances of so many things are therefore insufficient for optimal health because of the damage we've done to our cell walls.

Don't know much about this stuff, so I asked my dad, but he doesn't either as he's a CV surgeon, and all he does all day, is deal with the catastrophic end results of people's lifetimes of bad habits, but he did say that he thinks in the elderly, they often see deficiencies of the B vitamins, since almost no one eats according to the daily requirements. http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/vitamin...N=evidence
So, I said "Who DOES *eat right* ?", and he gave me the finger. So I suspect that was his highly medically educated way of saying "STFU Bucky". Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: