Things that science doesn't know (yet)

[philph]

This is purely for fun, fantasy and speculation. What surprise facts do you forecast will be discovered by science some time in the next 20 years?

I'm putting my money on these six shock announcements some time between now and Christmas 2029:

1. It turns out that obesity has a behavioural element.

2. A high-carb diet is not a "magic bullet" treatment for type 2 diabetes.

3. (This one will cause huge administrative turmoil for the people who oversee NHS health "targets" in Britain). Total Cholesterol is not a very meaningful indicator of health, compared with individual components such as LDL, HDL and their subtypes. (In the same week, statisticians will also disclose that a person's "total luck" isn't a useful metric unless you look at the individual components of good and bad luck. Also, meteorologists will introduce a guideline not to speak of "lots of weather coming this week".)

4. Strength exercises and short bursts of very intense exercise are not
inferior to regular "brisk" walks to and from the parking lot, in either their body-composition effects or their potential to improve health and quality of life.

5. Less is NOT always more. Sometimes less is just—well—less.

6. Your grandpa was right after all! "No pain, no gain"—long discredited as sadistic and counterintuitive propoganda from testosterone-poisoned tyrants who only wish to overturn our inalienable right to uninterrupted and effortless convenience—turns out to have more than a passing resemblence to the real world.

[guava]

Science already knows these things, and that's how you know them. Scientists have been having quite some difficulty convincing the general public about them.

Here's one that's in my fantasy:

In order to maintain a healthy weight, or to lose weight if you're overweight, you don't have to eat so little that you become hungry. You just have to restain yourself from ever eating so much that you're stuffed (or drinking so much that you're drunk).

I'd like to see more "diets" where they tell you you can eat as much as you want, as long as you eat a minimum amount of fluids, fibre, and vitamins and minerals. I think the cabbage soup diet has a lot of promise, with just a few tweaks to it.

[philph]

Originally Posted by guava

Science already knows these things, and that's how you know them. Scientists have been having quite some difficulty convincing the general public about them.

Ok, good point. All of the above things (including your own contributions) are already supported by research. I guess by "science" I meant practicioners who claim (mistakenly or otherwise) to be basing their policies on "science": doctors, health organisations, schools, etc), and, more generally, "scientific knowledge" as it is taught and acted on outside of research contexts.

[Xamilo]

1. It turns out that obesity has a behavioural element.

This has been a tested fact since Framingham's Study

2. A high-carb diet is not a "magic bullet" treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Who ever said it was? Type 2 Diabetes is about cell resistance to insulin which causes the high blood sugar levels.

3. Total Cholesterol is not a very meaningful indicator of health, compared with individual components such as LDL, HDL and their subtypes. (In the same week, statisticians will also disclose that a person's "total luck" isn't a useful metric unless you look at the individual components of good and bad luck. Also, meteorologists will introduce a guideline not to speak of "lots of weather coming this week".)

I've never seen anybody use Total Cholesterol as a health indicator. Hyper tension and Diabetes Cholesterol lowering goals are based on LDL, not on total CHL. As well, HDL levels are an indicator of "a healthy state". That's why you always discriminate HDL from Total CHL.

4. Strength exercises and short bursts of very intense exercise are not inferior to regular "brisk" walks to and from the parking lot, in either their body-composition effects or their potential to improve health and quality of life.

Evidence has based healthy workout means 25-35 minutes of "faster" walking pace 3 times a week. This is proven as well since, I think, forever.

5. Less is NOT always more. Sometimes less is just—well—less.

I didn't get the point in here.


I think I don't get your post at all. Everything you say is already been proven, so I'm kind of lost on the point behind it. I'm sory, I'm not trying to be a jerk, I just don't get it.

Cheers

[Hydrogen]

Originally Posted by Xamilo

I think I don't get your post at all. Everything you say is already been proven, so I'm kind of lost on the point behind it.

You certainly are - and us Poms say it's the Americans who aren't very good at getting satire and irony!

[philph]

Originally Posted by Xamilo

1. It turns out that obesity has a behavioural element.

This has been a tested fact since Framingham's Study

And yet health advisors give out almost uniformly inadequate and weak advice about lifestyle changes, for which they apologise by claiming that it is unrealistic to expect people to change. Failure is the default option.

2. A high-carb diet is not a "magic bullet" treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Who ever said it was? Type 2 Diabetes is about cell resistance to insulin which causes the high blood sugar levels.

When I was diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes, the NHS nutritionist (an anorexic stick insect of a girl) told me I needed to take my overwhelming intake from carbs, reduce all fats as low as possible, and drastically restrict protein intake. No mention was made of fibre, vitamnins, minerals, phytonutrients, EFA, EAA. Exercise could be added as an optional extra.

I've never seen anybody use Total Cholesterol as a health indicator. Hyper tension and Diabetes Cholesterol lowering goals are based on LDL, not on total CHL. As well, HDL levels are an indicator of "a healthy state". That's why you always discriminate HDL from Total CHL.

In the UK, the doctor has mostly simply said that things were good or bad according to total cholesterol. When I get my 6-monthly blood test results, I can usually (but not always) request more detailed info that shows individual figures for LDL, HDL and triglycerides—but if I didn't know (as a lot of patients maybe don't) to ask for them, they would often be absent from the consultation.

Evidence has based healthy workout means 25-35 minutes of "faster" walking pace 3 times a week. This is proven as well since, I think, forever.

And yet seemingly weekly we are advised from authoritative sources that it's sufficient just to rack up a few extra miles of walking. Some people would be very compliant and likely to progress with an exercise form that involved short bursts of extreme intensity, and yet (in my direct personal experience) weight training, for example, isn't in the doctor's therapeutic inventory (except for treating specific injuries—if you're lucky).

5. Less is NOT always more. Sometimes less is just—well—less.

I didn't get the point in here.

I think the moment has passed

[guava]

Originally Posted by philph

When I was diagnosed with Type 2 Diabetes, the NHS nutritionist (an anorexic stick insect of a girl) told me I needed to take my overwhelming intake from carbs, reduce all fats as low as possible, and drastically restrict protein intake. No mention was made of fibre, vitamnins, minerals, phytonutrients, EFA, EAA. Exercise could be added as an optional extra.

I looked over my step-father-in-law's recommendations and had exactly the same feeling. I swear my jaw dropped open, but I don't know him all that well and figured that at least it was probably better than his current diet, so I tried not to say anything about it. Of course, I couldn't completely hold my tongue, so I ended up trying not to say very much about it.

Suggested breakfasts were toast and fruit, or cereal and milk (no protein); suggested lunches were sandwiches, and suggested dinners included potatoes, rice or pasta. It was really weird. The thing they seemed most focused on restricting was lunch meat, which I agree is not the best thing in the world, but to a diabetic, probably not as much of a health hazard as refined grains, which weren't really given much attention either way.

[HevyMetal]

Surprise forecasts by scientists by 2029:-

(1)They expect a cure for cancer by 2050.

(2) Scientists must be allowed to take control of everything on the planet.....if we know what's good for us. And because we don't, we'd better let them run the ship.

(3) Scientists announce "Marshall McCluhan" day in honor of his statement that "the medium IS the message"....and as a result we'd all better get with the program.

(4) CO2 scrubbers are required to be worn by everybody all the time while breathing...if we want to save the planet.

(5) Because of pressure from the food manufacturing lobby cartel, scientists are forced to announce that trans-fats are harmless in order to receive further funding.

(6) Scientists blame everything on Donald Rumsfeld, saying that he made them do it, after the Swine-Flu Vaccine Program is exposed as a carefully-crafted population experiment gone horribly wrong.

(7) Scientists come out with a bumper sticker that reads "Honk if you love scientists".

(8) By 2019 there are two schools of scientists, of equal strength, on the earth. Those that believe that milk is good for you...and those that don't. A large battle commences on the Sahara desert, where they have gathered to wage war. The milk-drinking scientists win, as they have more strength and bodymass. But only by the tiniest of fractions, as the non-milk-drinking scientists are faster on their feet due to lower skin-fat percentage.

[guava]

Originally Posted by HevyMetal

Swine-Flu Vaccine Program is exposed as a carefully-crafted population experiment gone horribly wrong.

The vaccine is? The theory around our work place is that the swine flu is a manufactured disease.

It's probably just coincidence, but when I think about who I know that's contracted H1N1, it's overwhelmingly individuals who are at or just entering reproductive age - women 20-30, and boys and girls age 10 and up.

[JoeSchmo]

Originally Posted by guava

The vaccine is? The theory around our work place is that the swine flu is a manufactured disease.

Wow....people will manufacture conspiracy theories out of just about anything these days....

[HevyMetal]

Well......according to some sources:-

(a) Mexico is the last place on earth that this type of virus should have started at.

(b) Very soon after it was exposed, canadians at a research center in Winnipeg miraculoulsy find an anti-dote. Even though the rest of the world is still floundering.

(c) Days later a Canadian is apprehended trying to sneak into the U.S.A
with 18 vials of the Swine-Flu virus on his person. He came from Winnipeg.

(d) From the get-go this flu was blatantly labelled a "Pandemic".
Even before it had killed 50 people. Regular flu kills thousands more every year....and has never been labelled a "Pandemic".

(e) I just heard the other day that Donald Rumsfeld ( we all remember him) is highly connected with the company that manufactures the H1N1 anti-vaccine in the U.S.A.

(f) The vaccine reportedly contained Squalene....which First Gulf War vets are now having all kinds of problems from.

(g) The vaccine was pushed ..and pushed...and pushed...and pushed, You MUST have the vaccine or all hell will break loose. And...wouldn't you know it....now there's a shortage of vaccine, commanding a higher price for those that will pay because they feel they can't live without it.

(h) Awhile back around here there was a flu wave. I even had it myself about a month ago. As flu's go, the one I had was nothing special. I'd even say that it was much milder than types I've had before. I didn't go to the doctor because it wasn't severe enough.
However the media up here had the audacity to say that "if you've had the flu already it was more than likely H1N1".
This is "yellow" journalism at it's finest,IMO.

The media, for a long time, has been a tool of control. Since most of us can't prove the truth beyond the end of the block we live on, we can be fed any story as "gospel" by t.v., papers, radio from the powers that be and we will swallow it hook,line and sinker.

[JoeSchmo]

Well...Ok, but what motivation would the dark conspiratorial forces have for unleashing a relatively mild virus on the public?

[George]

Originally Posted by JoeSchmo

Well...Ok, but what motivation would the dark conspiratorial forces have for unleashing a relatively mild virus on the public?

Joe, that's what makes it so diabolical.
I wish people would take the time they spent gossiping about conspiracy theories and instead invest it into a little reading on microbiology and the history of the flu.

[HevyMetal]

It was relatively mild for me (if in fact it was H1N1)....but it is supposed to be "blue murder" for pregnant women,children and some ethnic groups.

As we are not allowed to wax "political" here, I can't go into the whole story (which is one of several stories). The mega-corporate world and politics are in many cases intertwined. But I cannot "go there".

[JoeSchmo]

Originally Posted by George

Joe, that's what makes it so diabolical.

George, your perspicacious insight strikes me as a little too convenient if you catch my drift. Level with us here George, you unleashed H1N1, didn't you.

Originally Posted by Hevy

It was relatively mild for me (if in fact it was H1N1)....but it is supposed to be "blue murder" for pregnant women,children and some ethnic groups.

Chances of death following infection with H1N1 turns out to be about half that of regular flu (according to the stats about a month ago), so most of the swine flu fears border on hysteria. If certain nefarious groups really wanted to FUBAR the human race, a much more effective strain would be the bird flu or variant of the spanish flu virus.

[George]

Originally Posted by JoeSchmo

Level with us here George, you unleashed H1N1, didn't you.

I may have unwittingly unleashed it on a few people that sat near me in my biochem class back in August.

The thought that I had swine flu didn't even cross my mind at the time, but the signs/symptoms seem pretty consistent now.

[Chopaholic]

Originally Posted by George

I wish people would take the time they spent gossiping about conspiracy theories and instead invest it into a little reading on microbiology and the history of the flu.

+1.

[modmaven]

Regarding the scientific knowledge versus practitioner knowledge theme of this thread, I once had a doc tell me I needed to make sure I had a low fat diet -- and then I pointed out to her the chart on her wall from a study that showed that there was no basis in fact for thinking that a low fat diet was healthier or likely to increase longevity in women.

It's so true that practitioners go by the conventional wisdom, not the scientifi wisdom. Just read Gary Taubes's books and articles for a wake up call.

[Jaer]

As I tell the people around work when my interests are questioned:

A year or two ago, we'd have laughed at the idea of a swine flue. Zombie flu might only be a couple years away.

My interests, in this case, would be my love/knowledge of zombies; I will be ready when the apocolypse occures!

[JoeSchmo]

Originally Posted by Jaer

A year or two ago, we'd have laughed at the idea of a swine flue. Zombie flu might only be a couple years away.

My interests, in this case, would be my love/knowledge of zombies; I will be ready when the apocolypse occures!

I think it is safe to say that most of us train these days in preparation for the impending apocolypse. It is up to JSFers to save the world from zombies, and I plan to be up to the physical challenge of doing so.