Anonymous
8/2/2025, 7:57:39 AM
No.11347331
>>11347318
>>neither did I
>but you first quoted the article then listed your issues with the article
>if you aren't quoting the article in regards to honey then what are you quoting? are you schizo? why mention honey for no reason?
They said:
1. If fructose (harms metabolism)
2. Then we should avoid honey
3. Honey is 40f/30g
I'm pointing out their contradictions and interplay they ignore.
>True of anything, no matter the correlation
you still haven't demonstrated the existence of a causal link
Correlation is suspected, simply hasn't been isolated in funded/respected studies.
>Really making that argument?
considering that those factors wouldn't matter in respect to the chemical effects of fructose in relation to the body it wouldn't be an important part of the article
>there is no discount here, they are measuring entirely different means by which insulin resistance manifests
Citation 73, 6 week rat
Citation 74, doesn't show in summary
I don't believe that 6 weeks will show causality, as adipogenesis is unique in young humans, and the lifecycle of rats in 6 greater relatively.
>if you give the average person (worldwide, presumably) fruit every day they will remain healthy and their metabolisms will not be adversely effected
I'd like to see this studied. I may disagree with the conclusion of a "healthy" person. That said, I believe that most thin people (selection bias) will be healthy with daily fruit.
>>neither did I
>but you first quoted the article then listed your issues with the article
>if you aren't quoting the article in regards to honey then what are you quoting? are you schizo? why mention honey for no reason?
They said:
1. If fructose (harms metabolism)
2. Then we should avoid honey
3. Honey is 40f/30g
I'm pointing out their contradictions and interplay they ignore.
>True of anything, no matter the correlation
you still haven't demonstrated the existence of a causal link
Correlation is suspected, simply hasn't been isolated in funded/respected studies.
>Really making that argument?
considering that those factors wouldn't matter in respect to the chemical effects of fructose in relation to the body it wouldn't be an important part of the article
>there is no discount here, they are measuring entirely different means by which insulin resistance manifests
Citation 73, 6 week rat
Citation 74, doesn't show in summary
I don't believe that 6 weeks will show causality, as adipogenesis is unique in young humans, and the lifecycle of rats in 6 greater relatively.
>if you give the average person (worldwide, presumably) fruit every day they will remain healthy and their metabolisms will not be adversely effected
I'd like to see this studied. I may disagree with the conclusion of a "healthy" person. That said, I believe that most thin people (selection bias) will be healthy with daily fruit.