News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by version_five on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @09:47PM (#30003798)
Yeah who knows what unequivocal advice we could be getting from experts right now that will be thoroughly debunked 70 years from now.

(Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on)

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by gruez on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:19PM (#30004076)
>(Are dairy and grains still food groups... I could easily go on)

I don't get it. Are you saying that grain shouldn't be a food group? I think for the purposes of categorizing foods, "starchy staples" is a pretty useful categorization, even if the recommendation to eat 8 servings a day or whatever is misguided.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by programmarchy on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:32PM (#30004677)
He's probably referring to the food pyramid, in which those food groups were put forth as foundational building blocks of a healthy diet according to the USDA. [1] That saga overlapped with the sugar lobby blaming fats for heart issues [2], and using their weight with the FDA to keep % Daily Values for sugars off food labels until very recently. [3]

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8375951/

[2] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/09/13/493739074...

[3] https://www.vox.com/2016/5/20/11719796/new-nutrition-label-a...

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by dylan604 on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:40PM (#30004250)
High Fructose Syrup is the one I'm holding out hope on.

Social Media consumption is another.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by ya_throw on Thursday January 20, 2022 @04:12AM (#30006583)
Yet the current zeitgeist is "Trust the experts, fool!"

We never frikkin learn.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by nzp7chfjks on Thursday January 20, 2022 @01:33PM (#30012721)
Using the word "science" to frame your argument automatically discredits any counterpoint.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by version_five on Thursday January 20, 2022 @10:25PM (#30018772)
This is why there is supposed to be separation of church and stage, but such rules didn't anticipate "science" becoming religion that is exempt from the criticism of religion. We need some updated principles that separate dogma and faith from legitimate motivations
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by ya_throw on Friday January 21, 2022 @04:05AM (#30020996)
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by idnefju on Thursday January 20, 2022 @02:50AM (#30006014)
some humans have been drinking animal dairy for so many thousands of years that some ethnicities have evolved to have a lactose breaking down mutation into adulthood
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by daenz on Thursday January 20, 2022 @11:54AM (#30011423)
>evolved

Not disagreeing, but that's a much nicer way of saying that nobody wanted to mate with the ones having constant diarrhea.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by lopis on Thursday January 20, 2022 @09:32AM (#30009359)
The amount of dairy and refined dairy products people consume today, like meat, is orders of magnitude bigger than back in the day.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by kipchak on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:38AM (#30005140)
Vegetable/seed oils is one I’ve been seeing recently.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by frozenport on Thursday January 20, 2022 @03:31AM (#30006308)
That vaping and nicotine is harmless (just like coffee!) despite seeing the negative effects of nicotine intake on developing fetuses.
[dead]
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by tasty_freeze on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:37AM (#30005137)
> Soy is poison

The concern about soy in infant food is well placed, but your broad statement is hyperbolic.

I don't know where you are, but I'm in the US, where 2/3 of adults are overweight, and half of them are obese. Whatever effect soy has on our endocrine systems, it is dwarfed by the effects caused by body fat itself.

As for the effect of soy on adults, for most people there is no problem unless they have excessive soy consumption, and those problems are fixed simply by eating less soy. Soy also has known health benefits, and an honest discussion would weigh the two.

From 2018: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC5646220/

"Neuroendocrine disruption by soya isoflavones in mature neuroendocrine systems is by and large reversible with dietary modification and thus, with the exception of some hypersensitive groups such as hypothyroid and oncology patients, soya likely poses no long term health risk and may even confer modest benefits."

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by champagnois on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:45AM (#30005199)
I agree with you on all points, but I will say that the thread topic is specifically about headlines 75 years from now rather than what current authorities claim today...

So naturally, every correct answer would be controversial in the present.

The truth eventually wins. It is no soy for my family.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by dragonwriter on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:50PM (#30004337)
> Now go take a look at the protein in every store bought baby formula option

Cow milk; the major infant formula brands, in their main product line, may include soy oil (they use a variety of oils depending on changing supply circumstances) which is not a protein source, and do not include any other soy products.

There are soy protein formulas for infants with galactosemia, who can take neither breast milk nor cow milk based formulas, but that's a fairly special niche.

> any store bought nutrition shake

Very often, cow milk (whey protein isolate and/or milk protein isolate are common), though soy and pea protein are also common.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by 30002926 on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:26PM (#30004621)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19524224/

"Clinical studies show no effects of soy protein or isoflavones on reproductive hormones in men: results of a meta-analysis"

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by collegeburner on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:33PM (#30004681)
"Clinical studies show this cigarette improves throat irritation"

The medical establishment is mostly government funded. The govermemt is in bed with big ag, ABCDs, and soy producers. I dont trust them on this.

Regardless a newer paper concludes more research needed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32824177/

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by sockaddr on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:04AM (#30004893)
Question: How do we reconcile "soy is poison" with the fact that some cultures include massive amounts of soy in their diet with little known detriment?

For instance, the Japanese seem to eat tons of the stuff in various forms all the time but they seem to lead healthy lives.

I don't have any skin in the game, just curious.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by ars on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:33AM (#30005102)
I have no authoritative knowledge here, but the typical answer is they eat mostly fermented soy. I personally have no idea if that actually matters, but that's the answer I've heard.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by champagnois on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:33AM (#30005100)
Asian cultures are aware.

In China for example, tofu is one of the cheapest possible protein sources (think in terms of a massive pallet of it sold for five dollars) but people are generally aware that it is poisonous in some weird ways that won't kill you. Males are generally urged not to consume it.

This could be a knowledge of just the upper class, though. An unspoken suggestion to leave the tofu and soy for the poor.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by sooheon on Thursday January 20, 2022 @01:15AM (#30005421)
According to this (https://www.otsuka.co.jp/en/nutraceutical/about/soylution/en...) Japan consumes 8.19 kg/year/person of soy, while the US consumes 0.04 kg/year/person. That's 200x difference. Japanese life expectancy is half a decade longer than the US, not to mention 1/10 the obesity.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by fomine3 on Thursday January 20, 2022 @01:37AM (#30005565)
I'm surprised how big the difference. 40g/y seems to just eat soy once per year, despite soy are farmed in the US.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by simlevesque on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:47AM (#30005213)
So it's all a big conspiracy of the elite against the masses ?
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by chihuahua on Thursday January 20, 2022 @02:41AM (#30005948)
Pretty much anything is a conspiracy if you ask certain people.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by boogies on Thursday January 20, 2022 @02:52AM (#30006024)
No group of professionals meets except to conspire against the public at large.

— Mark Twain

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by lifeformed on Thursday January 20, 2022 @01:09AM (#30005374)
So the vast majority of Asians have disrupted endocrine systems?
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by blindmute on Thursday January 20, 2022 @07:58PM (#30017772)
Asian cultures also have some of the shortest people, lowest testosterone men, and physically weakest men in the world. Whether this is worth a few more years of lifespan is up to the eater.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by Melatonic on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:05PM (#30004445)
This is just completely BS

Legumes are great for you - keep eating them.

Obviously don't eat some super processed soybean adjacent "food".

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by jjeaff on Thursday January 20, 2022 @01:21AM (#30005458)
Apparently, the least processed forms of soybean contain the most endocrine disrupting substance.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by jack1243star on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:47PM (#30004310)
And yet the Japanese have high life expectancy?
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by DoreenMichele on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:00PM (#30004406)
Not necessarily evidence that it isn't problematic for other people. The Japanese seem to be different in ways we are still trying to sort out.

The prevalence of cigarette smoking among Japanese men has been consistently high compared with Western males over the past 30 years. However, during the same period, the incidence of and mortality rates for lung cancer have consistently been lower in Japan than in Western countries ('Japanese smoking paradox').

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12889681/

[dead]
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by 30002926 on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:25PM (#30004615)
How do you know this?
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by champagnois on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:36AM (#30005127)
Chinese family. Have lived there and among chinese elite for most of my life.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by fomine3 on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:51AM (#30005251)
Not true in Japan. Everyone eat soy based foods like tofu without worrying.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by jrockway on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:23PM (#30004596)
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by tonmoy on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:46PM (#30004300)
Can you cite some sources please?
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by belinder on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:51PM (#30004342)
More recent paper I found says we dont really know yet what happens

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2019.00142...

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by 30002926 on Thursday January 20, 2022 @12:27AM (#30005063)
The focus of that study is on pregnant women and developing fetuses. That's a far cry from "Soy is poison" full stop.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by DoreenMichele on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @10:52PM (#30004346)
It may not be soy per se. It may be GMO soy that's the problem. From what I gather, a very high percentage of soy is GMO, far more than is typical for most food items.
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by dragonwriter on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:06PM (#30004448)
> It may not be soy per se. It may be GMO soy that's the problem

No, to the extent there are endocrine issues with soy, it has nothing to do with GMO soy.

> From what I gather, a very high percentage of soy is GMO, far more than is typical for most food items.

94%, about the same as corn @ 92%.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by DoreenMichele on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:18PM (#30004553)
No, to the extent there are endocrine issues with soy, it has nothing to do with GMO soy.

I was responding to the first assertion -- that it's "poison." I don't know enough about this topic to really argue about what it does to the endocrine system.

94%, about the same as corn @ 92%.

94% sounds pretty freaking high to me personally.

Thank you for putting some numbers to that for me.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by seattle_spring on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:01PM (#30004416)
What exactly is the health difference between GMO and non-GMO soy? Any reputable sources you can share?
Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by DoreenMichele on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:23PM (#30004593)
I don't have sources, sorry, and probably shouldn't have replied because my remark falls under what HN likes to dismiss as anecdotal:

I have trouble tolerating soy. Someone I trust suggested to me it might not be soy per se that I have an issue with. It might be GMO soy that is an issue for me.

Some years ago, I did look up stats verifying that soy was GMO at a shockingly high percentage. I had no reason to track those sources and haven't revisited it recently.

In my case, this seems like a plausible explanation for my issue. Though I have a genetic disorder and I'm very sensitive to all kinds of details of food chemistry and pay close attention to such for my health. But "It works for me" has never been respected anywhere on the planet as any kind of meaningful observation that anyone wants to hear.

Feel free to ignore it.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by dragonwriter on Thursday January 20, 2022 @03:29AM (#30006293)
> I have trouble tolerating soy

Trouble tolerating soy is one of the more common problems with food tolerance.

> Someone I trust suggested to me it might not be soy per se that I have an issue with. It might be GMO soy that is an issue for me.

It's theoretically possible that this could be the case, even though GMO foods are much more extensively tested for general safety than crops developed through means that aren't technically GMO (including ones that produces larger and less predictable genetic changes, like modifying the genetics by mutagenesis), but it's kind of a weird thing to suggest, given how frequently soy is a problem (which has been true longer than GMO soy has been on the market) without some very strong reason to believe it's not just a problem with soy as such.

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by DoreenMichele on Thursday January 20, 2022 @03:52AM (#30006461)
I've been here more than twelve years. I've interacted with you enough that I'm fairly confident you are someone who recognizes my name.

I get endless flak from the world for me being me. One part of that is that I have a genetic disorder -- which I'm quite open about -- and I'm getting well when the entire world tells me that's simply not possible and openly hates on me for -- as best I can tell -- being a former homemaker who spent years homeless who has the audacity to be so incredibly rude as to figure out how to manage my condition with diet and lifestyle instead of drugs and surgeries, thereby making doctors and scientists look "stupid" I guess and we can't have none of that, so no one takes it seriously that I know anything at all about medical anything -- and yet there is this comment about how fluid circulates in the human body with 121 upvotes for whatever damn reason: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25427090

And the way I get treated on HN on that detail of my life aggravates me to no end because I feel like the evidence that I'm not lying or making shit up can be found in my twelve plus year track record of posting here in that my comments are no longer routinely typo-riddled gibberish like they used to so frequently be because I'm generally in less pain, etc these days, having gotten myself healthier.

And in spite of my significant handicap, I seem to be the only openly female member who has ever made the leaderboard and I've done it twice under two different handles, yet the degree to which I get treated differently from other members and also told it's not due to my gender persists and makes me nuts, which may or may not be a factor in me spending less time here in recent months. I really don't know what exactly is driving that. There are too many confounding variables for me to sort that question myself.

Feel free to chalk this up to "Doreen is a loon imagining she is getting better when everyone knows that's not possible, so let's just say she's crazy because her experiences rudely fall outside the all important Overton Window of what people are allowed to believe. And this is one of those utterly nutty things she says rooted in her delusion." and please move on because other than "anecdote" and "I think I know stuff because my damn body works better than it is supposed to" I don't have a leg to stand on here and I am so sick of this entire thing.

With all the smart self made millionaires and people with PhDs and what not that hang here, you would think someone would be able to think for themselves and conclude "Maybe the lady is not nuts and not making shit up and in actual fact has done what she claims."

But, no, no girls actually allowed in the old boys club filled with the best of the best of the best, sir!

Re:When cigarette companies used doctors to push smoking (2018) by hammock on Wednesday January 19, 2022 @11:19PM (#30004558)
The difference would be pesticide residue