Whole Foods is like Vegas. You go there to feel good but you leave broke, disoriented, and with the newfound knowledge that you have a vaginal disease.
Unlike Vegas, Whole Foods' clientele are all about mindfulness and compassion... until they get to the parking lot. Then it's war. As I pull up this morning, I see a pregnant lady on the crosswalk holding a baby and groceries. This driver swerves around her and honks. As he speeds off I catch his bumper sticker which says 'NAMASTE'. Poor lady didn't even hear him approaching because he was driving a Prius. He crept up on her like a panther.
As the great, sliding glass doors part I am immediately smacked in the face by a wall of cool, moist air that smells of strawberries and orchids. I leave behind the concrete jungle and enter a cornucopia of organic bliss; the land of hemp milk and honey. Seriously, think about Heaven and then think about Whole Foods; they're basically the same.
The first thing I see is the great wall of kombucha -- 42 different kinds of rotten tea. Fun fact: the word kombucha is Japanese for 'I gizzed in your tea.' Anyone who's ever swallowed the glob of mucus at the end of the bottle knows exactly what I'm talking about. I believe this thing is called "The Mother" which makes it that much creepier.
Next I see the gluten-free section filled with crackers and bread made from various wheat-substitutes such as cardboard and sawdust. I skip this aisle because I'm not rich enough to have dietary restrictions. Ever notice that you don't meet poor people with special diet needs? A gluten intolerant house cleaner? A cab driver with Candida? Candida is what I call a rich, white person problem. You know you've really made it in this world when you get Candida. My personal theory is that Candida is something you get from too much hot yoga. All I'm saying is if I were a yeast, I would want to live in your yoga pants.
Next I approach the beauty aisle. There is a scary looking machine there that you put your face inside of and it tells you exactly how ugly you are. They calculate your wrinkles, sun spots, the size of your pores, etc. and compare it to other women your age. I think of myself attractive but as it turns out, I am 78 percent ugly, meaning less pretty than 78 percent of women in the world. On the popular 1-10 hotness scale used by males the world over, that makes me a 3 (if you round up, which I hope you will.) A glance at the extremely close-up picture they took of my face, in which I somehow have a glorious, blond porn mustache, tells me that 3 is about right. Especially because the left side of my face is apparently 20 percent more aged than the right. Fantastic. After contemplating ending it all here and now, I decide instead to buy their product. One bottle of delicious smelling, silky feeling creme that is maybe going to raise me from a 3 to a 4 for only $108 which is a pretty good deal when you think about it.
I grab a handful of peanut butter pretzels on my way out of this stupid aisle. I don't feel bad about pilfering these bites because of the umpteen times that I've overpaid at the salad bar and been tricked into buying $108 beauty creams. The pretzels are very fattening but I'm already in the seventieth percentile of ugly so who cares.
Next I come to the vitamin aisle which is a danger zone for any broke hypochondriac. Warning: Whole Foods keeps their best people in this section. Although you think she's a homeless person at first, that vitamin clerk is an ex-pharmaceuticals sales rep. Today she talks me into buying estrogen for my mystery mustache and Women's Acidophilus because apparently I DO have Candida after all.
I move on to the next isle and ask the nearest Whole Foods clerk for help. He's wearing a visor inside and as if that weren't douchey enough, it has one word on it in all caps. Yup, NAMASTE. I ask him where I can find whole wheat bread. He chuckles at me "Oh, we keep the poison in aisle 7." Based solely on the attitudes of people sporting namaste paraphernalia today, I'd think it was Sanskrit for "go feth yourself."
I pass the table where the guy invites me to join a group cleanse he's leading. For $179.99 I can not-eat not-alone... not-gonna-happen. They're doing the cleanse where you consume nothing but lemon juice, cayenne pepper and fiber pills for 10 days, what's that one called again? Oh, yeah...anorexia. I went on a cleanse once; it was a mixed blessing. On the one hand, I detoxified, I purified, I lost weight. On the other hand, I fell asleep on the highway, fantasized about eating a pigeon, and crapped my pants. I think I'll stick with the whole eating thing.
I grab a couple of loaves of poison, and head to checkout. The fact that I'm at Whole Foods on a Sunday finally sinks in when I join the end of the line...halfway down the dog food aisle. I suddenly realize that I'm dying to get out of this store. Maybe it's the lonely feeling of being a carnivore in a sea of vegans, or the newfound knowledge that some people's dogs eat better than I do, but mostly I think it's the fact that Yanni has been playing literally this entire time. Like sensory deprivation, listening to Yanni seems harmless at first, enjoyable even. But two hours in, you'll chew your own ear off to make it stop.
A thousand minutes later, I get to the cashier. She is 95 percent beautiful. "Have you brought your reusable bags?" feth. No, they are at home with their 2 dozen once-used friends. She rings up my meat, alcohol, gluten and a wrapper from the chocolate bar I ate in line, with thinly veiled alarm. She scans my ladies acidophilus, gives me a pitying frown and whispers, "Ya know, if you wanna get rid of your Candida, you should stop feeding it." She rings me up for $313. I resist the urge to unwrap and swallow whole another $6 truffle in protest. Barely. Instead, I reach for my wallet, flash her a quiet smile and say, "Namaste."
The depressing thing is it's not that far off from the truth. I went into a "whole foods" shop over here in the UK and asked if they sold non-organic versions of all the stuff they sell you can't get easily in a supermarket(organic farming is a grotesquely irresponsible practice that, were it adopted as the default farming policy as some seem to wish, would result in the death by starvation of essentially the entire non-developed world), and I've never seen someone's face run through disgust, contempt, barely-contained rage, the sort of expression you imagine someone would have if a Cthulhu-esque monster appeared in from of them, and the strained politeness of shoddy customer service staff the world over so quickly
Ahtman wrote: The other nice thing about Whole Foods is that it helps you know which areas to rob and which ones to avoid.
Now there's good information to know Ahtman!
I hate Whole Foods with the burning passion of a thousand hot suns, if those thousand hot suns had a bit of a hangover and couldn't get roused enough to get a full fledged rage on. The one positive is I respect their ability to flim flam the people they flim flam, whom I despise even more.
It just makes my inner Lenin screaming out. Note I live in drigving distance fo their headquarters and there are real fanatics here about it.
Whats interesting is that with the REAL organic stores and markets I don't have this issue. Ok I will laugh at a Vegan occasionally dying near the entrance, but hey I'm just mean that way.
I only shopped at whole foods for 2 months while I was on a business trip - so I had $60 per day food budget, but yeah it is not worth going there.
The employees would bend over backwards for you though, I asked if they had a particular brand/flavour of chips and the guy went on a 10 minute search, despite me telling him not to worry about it.
I've been into walmart maybe only 5 times - thankfully as it was unpleasant.
I'm so happy there isn't a prevalence of this type of store in Montreal. There's a few, and you'll always find some bio (the French version of organic, as if regular food wasn't biological) in every store... but I'm not embarassed not to buy any.
I doubt even "organic" seeds these day don't come from something that has felt the touch of man. Since when did man-made become synonymous with evil, poisonous and destructive? We live twice as long as our ancestors!
See, I think we're a little bit lucky in Ohio when it comes to "organic" or "naturally" raised food because we have a lot of Amish and lot of farmers, and so can get legit small farm raised stuff pretty easily.
cincydooley wrote: See, I think we're a little bit lucky in Ohio when it comes to "organic" or "naturally" raised food because we have a lot of Amish and lot of farmers, and so can get legit small farm raised stuff pretty easily.
Now thats cool. I'm absolutely down with farmer's markets. Good stuff!
If you want organic, got to your local Farmers market. They are decently priced(Not too bad) and yu directly support them.
I bet If i digged deep enough I could find something abut how Whole food screws farmers over.
cincydooley wrote: See, I think we're a little bit lucky in Ohio when it comes to "organic" or "naturally" raised food because we have a lot of Amish and lot of farmers, and so can get legit small farm raised stuff pretty easily.
Huh, I must just be too white and rich, I love going there!
Their selection of meats and produce is insane! Granted we don't usually buy much of the boxed items, just produce, meat and coffee (OH the wonderful COFFEE!).
The article just seems like yet another subtle commentary inciting the class-war idea that everyone with more money than you is evil somehow.
cincydooley wrote: See, I think we're a little bit lucky in Ohio when it comes to "organic" or "naturally" raised food because we have a lot of Amish and lot of farmers, and so can get legit small farm raised stuff pretty easily.
Indeed! 3 chickens for every person in the state!
Yup.
I mean, we're not huge on organic food at our house, but amish raised chicken from Findlay Market in Cincy is, IMO, legitimately better tasting than it's "Tyson-style" counterpart. It's also usually a great deal smaller, which makes it much easier to cook.
Their selection of meats and produce is insane! Granted we don't usually buy much of the boxed items, just produce, meat and coffee (OH the wonderful COFFEE!).
Why not Publix? Everytime we're in Spring Hill, Publix seems to have really great meat.
cincydooley wrote: See, I think we're a little bit lucky in Ohio when it comes to "organic" or "naturally" raised food because we have a lot of Amish and lot of farmers, and so can get legit small farm raised stuff pretty easily.
Indeed! 3 chickens for every person in the state!
Yup.
I mean, we're not huge on organic food at our house, but amish raised chicken from Findlay Market in Cincy is, IMO, legitimately better tasting than it's "Tyson-style" counterpart. It's also usually a great deal smaller, which makes it much easier to cook.
My dad had a massive diet change last year, and the only thing we eat now is fish and chicken... I've had far too much chicken, I miss beef, but I do agree that amish raised chicken is tasty.
Whole Foods coming to our city has been awesome because it forced all our regular grocery stores to step up their game.
Now the mean reason I go to Whole Foods are the fact that they have a pretty great Produce section and Cheese section. I could care less about the boxed organic non-dairy non-gluten whatchamacallits in the middle of the store.
But since Whole Foods got here, our regular grocery stores expanded their produce sections, got actual meat counters instead of vacuum sealed meat from who-knows-where, got good cheese and breads. And you still have all your normal (and normally priced) goods in the regular sections of the store.
cincydooley wrote: We tried to do Paleo for about a month, my wife and I did, and I learned two things:
1. It's really impossible, because there are things that are Paleo that you don't think should be (beans, corn).
2. Reducing my dairy intake really does make my feel a lot better.
The reason I mention this Alf: Red Meat is a primary protein in the Paleo diet.
One of my co-workers goes through 'fits' of paleo diet. He'll come to work with nothing but things like jerky, nuts, fruit, etc...
I've also given up dairy in 80% of cases. We have Almond milk with is good if you get the vanilla or chocolate varieties, still have some regular milk for cooking and what not, and cheese. Other than that I don't eat dairy... I used to be a bowl of cereal at breakfast, cup of milk at lunch and cheese, and milk at dinner kind of kid...
I just miss red meat, thankfully I don't mind that we've gone gluten free in my household as gluten free bread is actually really good and toasts up nice and evenly (perfect for grilled cheese!) and gluten free brownies are tasty as hell
We raise our own chickens and get raw milk from our friend's farm, as well as local maple syrup and we have a large garden. We might get half a beef if my SIL goes in on it, cut and freeze the meat. In our garden, blight took out 24 tomato plants and half our potatoes this year, but our corn, cabbage, brocolli, cauliflower, peppers and spinach came up fine though. Going to the Mother Earth News Fair this weekend http://www.motherearthnews.com/fair/home.aspx to hang with the crunchy granola set
My wife loves whole foods, but for the homeopathic and supplements. The other stuff is just overpriced. We get just as good or better at Aldi's for a low price.
Alfndrate wrote: I just miss red meat, thankfully I don't mind that we've gone gluten free in my household as gluten free bread is actually really good and toasts up nice and evenly (perfect for grilled cheese!) and gluten free brownies are tasty as hell
I cannot imagine not eating red meat.
Also, this may be news but... Normal bread toasts up nice and evenly and I've even heard that normal brownies are tasty as hell.
I've also given up dairy in 80% of cases. We have Almond milk with is good if you get the vanilla or chocolate varieties, still have some regular milk for cooking and what not, and cheese. Other than that I don't eat dairy... I used to be a bowl of cereal at breakfast, cup of milk at lunch and cheese, and milk at dinner kind of kid...
That's about where we are. We use almond 'milk' in our breakfast smoothies, I don't drink milk anymore with meals or whatnot, and I now rarely eat cheese. I've had a bit more cheese the past two weeks, and quite frankly, its been wreaking havoc on my bowels.
We'll probably do some meat and cheeses during awards season (its like, our little tradition) but beyond that, my stomach just can't do it anymore.
Alfndrate wrote: I just miss red meat, thankfully I don't mind that we've gone gluten free in my household as gluten free bread is actually really good and toasts up nice and evenly (perfect for grilled cheese!) and gluten free brownies are tasty as hell
I cannot imagine not eating red meat.
Also, this may be news but... Normal bread toasts up nice and evenly and I've even heard that normal brownies are tasty as hell.
I still sneak in a burger here or there, but if I eat at home 6 nights out of the week I can bet that we will have turkey/chicken 'italian style' sausages at least once, chicken twice, fish twice, turkey patties once, and maybe ground chicken/turkey for tacos.
Also normal bread doesn't hold up as well as gluten free bread, and normal brownies are tasty as hell, but I don't mind the fact that we've gone gluten free in my house because those gluten free versions aren't gak.
cincydooley wrote: We tried to do Paleo for about a month, my wife and I did, and I learned two things:
1. It's really impossible, because there are things that are Paleo that you don't think should be (beans, corn).
2. Reducing my dairy intake really does make my feel a lot better.
The reason I mention this Alf: Red Meat is a primary protein in the Paleo diet.
One of my co-workers goes through 'fits' of paleo diet. He'll come to work with nothing but things like jerky, nuts, fruit, etc...
I've also given up dairy in 80% of cases. We have Almond milk with is good if you get the vanilla or chocolate varieties, still have some regular milk for cooking and what not, and cheese. Other than that I don't eat dairy... I used to be a bowl of cereal at breakfast, cup of milk at lunch and cheese, and milk at dinner kind of kid...
I just miss red meat, thankfully I don't mind that we've gone gluten free in my household as gluten free bread is actually really good and toasts up nice and evenly (perfect for grilled cheese!) and gluten free brownies are tasty as hell
Dude... try the Gluten-free pizza at Dominos... those things are sneaky good!
Ugh, I have hypocondriac neo-yuppie coworkers who always rant about how much better and healthier their unpasturized milk and gluten free cardboard is. One of them actually drinks Kombucha. She got pissed at me when I told her that her suspicious of "wifi allergy" was entirely psychosomatic, and studies have proven it as such.
These people need real tragedy and strife in their lives to wake them up from their imaginary plights.
daedalus wrote: Ugh, I have hypocondriac neo-yuppie coworkers who always rant about how much better and healthier their unpasturized milk and gluten free cardboard is. One of them actually drinks Kombucha. She got pissed at me when I told her that her suspicious of "wifi allergy" was entirely psychosomatic, and studies have proven it as such.
These people need real tragedy and strife in their lives to wake them up from their imaginary plights.
Unpasteurized milk sounds like a bad time, and I can't say there is any inherent health benefits to gluten free breads since my life style hasn't changed much. My dad dropped a crapload of weight when he switched over (went from 260 to 215 in like 6 months and got his beetus under control), I've pretty much remained at a constant 250.
Also wifi allergy? That's a 'thing' people think they can 'have'?
Also whembly, I've had it, it's not bad. Udi's makes a decent 'thin crust' gluten free pizza
What? don't you see? You do that thing that gluten is supposed to do for bready things. It was you all along.
Several grains and starch sources are considered acceptable for a gluten-free diet. The most frequently used are corn, potatoes, rice, and tapioca (derived from cassava). Other grains and starch sources generally considered suitable for gluten-free diets include amaranth, arrowroot, millet, montina, lupin, quinoa, sorghum (jowar), taro, teff, chia seed, and yam. Sometimes various types of bean, soybean, and nut flours are used in gluten-free products to add protein and dietary fiber.
Almond flour has a low glycemic index, and is a low-carbohydrate alternative to wheat flour. In spite of its name, buckwheat is not related to wheat. Pure buckwheat is considered acceptable for a gluten-free diet, however, many commercial buckwheat products are mixtures of wheat and buckwheat flours, and thus, not gluten-free. Gram flour, derived from chickpeas, also is gluten-free (this is not the same as Graham flour made from wheat).
Chickpeas
Gluten may be used in foods in some unexpected ways, for example it may be added as a stabilizing agent or thickener in products such as ice-cream and ketchup.[9][10]
People wishing to follow a completely gluten-free diet must take into consideration the ingredients of any over-the-counter or prescription medications and vitamins. Also, cosmetics such as lipstick, lip balms, and lip gloss may contain gluten and need to be investigated before use. Glues used on envelopes may also contain gluten.
So any and all of the above mentioned could be used to replace nasty, commie, heathen, bowel blocking gluten-y...stuff.
Housing the contents of my Turkey sammich today was Udi's White Sandwich Bread. It's 'flour' component is made up of TAPIOCA & POTATO STARCH, BROWN RICE FLOUR, MODIFIED TAPIOCA STARCH, so it's missing the "wheat flour' aspect which is what contains gluten.
daedalus wrote: Ugh, I have hypocondriac neo-yuppie coworkers who always rant about how much better and healthier their unpasturized milk and gluten free cardboard is. One of them actually drinks Kombucha. She got pissed at me when I told her that her suspicious of "wifi allergy" was entirely psychosomatic, and studies have proven it as such.
These people need real tragedy and strife in their lives to wake them up from their imaginary plights.
Indeed. In the absence of real threats and enemies, you invent them.
Unpasteurized milk sounds like a bad time, and I can't say there is any inherent health benefits to gluten free breads since my life style hasn't changed much. My dad dropped a crapload of weight when he switched over (went from 260 to 215 in like 6 months and got his beetus under control), I've pretty much remained at a constant 250.
I've been making my own bread, so while "gluteny", it doesn't have any added sugar or anything, so I'm telling myself it's as healthy as I'm going to get.
Also wifi allergy? That's a 'thing' people think they can 'have'?
Apparently the site owner 'contracted' the 'disease' while driving around on a new lawnmower..
The owner also goes on to recommend snake oi... err, "patches" and "detectors" one can use to better find EMF radiation and elimiate it from your life, allowing your body to return to its own "God given frequencies". Again, I'm not making this up:
All I have to say is that I wish I could have gotten in. I'm upset that I'll have to wait until the next big technology to prey upon the unfounded fears of those who can't seem to spend all their money fast enough.
Why do people hate yuppies so much? They are so gullible Come up with some bs sickness and say you have to cure in the form of crushed berries pissed on by a platypus and you will make millions
Actually, raw milk is very tasty, and is great in milk shakes and hot chocolate (or cold).
It also contains probiotic bacteria and antimicrobial enzymes and is easier to digest. Plus, especially if you know the farmer, you know what the cow is eating. I prefer a free-grazing cow for both dairy and meat as opposed to an animal that is fed something that is as nutritional as cardboard. You want an evil corporation to rail against, you cant find a more vile and abusive company than one called Monsanto. Look them up.....
daedalus wrote: Ugh, I have hypocondriac neo-yuppie coworkers who always rant about how much better and healthier their unpasturized milk and gluten free cardboard is. One of them actually drinks Kombucha. She got pissed at me when I told her that her suspicious of "wifi allergy" was entirely psychosomatic, and studies have proven it as such.
These people need real tragedy and strife in their lives to wake them up from their imaginary plights.
Unpasteurized milk sounds like a bad time, and I can't say there is any inherent health benefits to gluten free breads since my life style hasn't changed much. My dad dropped a crapload of weight when he switched over (went from 260 to 215 in like 6 months and got his beetus under control), I've pretty much remained at a constant 250.
Also wifi allergy? That's a 'thing' people think they can 'have'?
Also whembly, I've had it, it's not bad. Udi's makes a decent 'thin crust' gluten free pizza
Unless you are actually allergic to gluten there is no good reason to avoid it, so my doctor tells me.
And WiFi allergy is just a mental thing. Its the same people who hire electricians to wrap all the wires in their houses with tinfoil so they don't cause brain interferance .
Unless you are actually allergic to gluten there is no good reason to avoid it, so my doctor tells me.
And WiFi allergy is just a mental thing. Its the same people who hire electricians to wrap all the wires in their houses with tinfoil so they don't cause brain interferance .
But sometimes fake illnesses can really make you ill, and fake cures can actually cure you.
Just because a disease isn't real doesn't mean that it can't really make you sick. The mind is powerful and the placebo effect goes both ways.
Not saying that the people aren't a bit crazy, but they might actually really be physically sick.
Grey Templar wrote: Unless you are actually allergic to gluten there is no good reason to avoid it, so my doctor tells me.
\
Every doctor I have ever read or talked to said the same thing. The trick, I suppose, is the number of people who think they are allergic to it as opposed to the number who have been diagnosed with it is probably quite large. I remember some doctor saying that if the Gluten Free section in grocery stores represented the number of people who actually should be gluten free it would need to be 800% smaller than it is.
Grey Templar wrote: Oddly enough, cows actually can eat cardboard. They can digest the fiber in paper products just fine.
UC Davis did a study where cows were fed only news paper, and select vitamins, for several generations with no major problems.
Unless you are actually allergic to gluten there is no good reason to avoid it, so my doctor tells me.
And WiFi allergy is just a mental thing. Its the same people who hire electricians to wrap all the wires in their houses with tinfoil so they don't cause brain interferance .
These are the same people who tell us salt is bad for you, salt is good for you, salt is bad for you, salt is good for you.......
Just because they can eat cardboard, doesnt mean they should. Id much rather consume a more natural product than one that needs vitamins added to be considered nutritious.
For what it's worth, anyone who actually has an intolerance to gluten is going to be lamenting the fact that they can't eat gluten, not celebrate it.
Both my father and grandfather are celiac (leaving me with a lovely 50% chance of getting it), and they'd kill for a chance to eat some proper bread-based products without getting violently ill.
The people on their high horses about eating gluten free are only that way because they get the choice.
These are the same people who tell us salt is bad for you, salt is good for you, salt is bad for you, salt is good for you.......
Just because they can eat cardboard, doesnt mean they should. Id much rather consume a more natural product than one that needs vitamins added to be considered nutritious.
Well, most processed food DOES contain more salt than it should, but I do agree that the "salt is bad for you" talking point is way overplayed.
I've always preferred the taste of pepper to salt anyway, but that's me.
Spacemanvic wrote: My wife loves whole foods, but for the homeopathic and supplements. The other stuff is just overpriced.
Wait, you're buying $99999999 bottles of water and you're complaining that the other stuff is overpriced?
And the fact that whole foods even has a homeopathic section is one of the reasons to hate those scamming s. They might have figured out that "pretentious rich vegans" is a profitable market to exploit, but they're the same greedy sociopaths as every other large company.
Wait, you're buying $99999999 bottles of water and you're complaining that the other stuff is overpriced?
And the fact that whole foods even has a homeopathic section is one of the reasons to hate those scamming s. They might have figured out that "pretentious rich vegans" is a profitable market to exploit, but they're the same greedy sociopaths as every other large company.
Spacemanvic wrote: My wife loves whole foods, but for the homeopathic and supplements. The other stuff is just overpriced.
Wait, you're buying $99999999 bottles of water and you're complaining that the other stuff is overpriced?
And the fact that whole foods even has a homeopathic section is one of the reasons to hate those scamming s. They might have figured out that "pretentious rich vegans" is a profitable market to exploit, but they're the same greedy sociopaths as every other large company.
H--o-m-e-o-p-a-t-h-i-c stuff, not $99999999 bottles of water.
My wife now buys her herbs direct from suppliers and makes her own tinctures, but we still buy some premade homepathic meds from places like Highlands. The bulk of medicine today has it's roots in botany and herbology, so what we do isnt that far from the norm. Also, we are no where near rich, nor vegans, but we like to be responsible for our well being. Of course, there are some things that require stronger "magicks" (sic), so we do go to an MD who is also a homeopath who does prescribe regular meds as needed.
Modern pharma doenst have that stellar of a track record, especially when one of the side-effects "may include death".
Spacemanvic wrote: H--o-m-e-o-p-a-t-h-i-c stuff, not $99999999 bottles of water.
Homeopathic = bottles of water. There is no credible evidence that homeopathic "medicine" is anything but a scam selling bottles of water at vastly inflated prices, and the supposed mechanism is obvious nonsense.
Now, if you want to talk about using herbs or whatever (without diluting them to the point that there isn't even a single atom of them left in the final result) then that's an entirely different subject.
Spacemanvic wrote: H--o-m-e-o-p-a-t-h-i-c stuff, not $99999999 bottles of water.
Homeopathic = bottles of water. There is no credible evidence that homeopathic "medicine" is anything but a scam selling bottles of water at vastly inflated prices, and the supposed mechanism is obvious nonsense.
Now, if you want to talk about using herbs or whatever (without diluting them to the point that there isn't even a single atom of them left in the final result) then that's an entirely different subject.
No, it also includes solids, not bottles of water. We dont buy the diluted crap.
My wife now buys her herbs direct from suppliers and makes her own tinctures, but we still buy some premade homepathic meds from places like Highlands. The bulk of medicine today has it's roots in botany and herbology, so what we do isnt that far from the norm. Also, we are no where near rich, nor vegans, but we like to be responsible for our well being. Of course, there are some things that require stronger "magicks" (sic), so we do go to an MD who is also a homeopath who does prescribe regular meds as needed.
Modern pharma doenst have that stellar of a track record, especially when one of the side-effects "may include death".
Spacemanvic wrote:Actually, raw milk is very tasty, and is great in milk shakes and hot chocolate (or cold).
It also contains probiotic bacteria and antimicrobial enzymes and is easier to digest. Plus, especially if you know the farmer, you know what the cow is eating. I prefer a free-grazing cow for both dairy and meat as opposed to an animal that is fed something that is as nutritional as cardboard. You want an evil corporation to rail against, you cant find a more vile and abusive company than one called Monsanto. Look them up.....
Yeah, we've seen the threads on them before, they're evil, they're in everything, they're changing their name to Umbrella soon....
Grey Templar wrote:
Unless you are actually allergic to gluten there is no good reason to avoid it, so my doctor tells me.
And WiFi allergy is just a mental thing. Its the same people who hire electricians to wrap all the wires in their houses with tinfoil so they don't cause brain interferance .
My dad's diabetes has come under better control since he cut gluten out and he uses far less insulin than he used to. I'm not allergic to gluten, gluten-free is just all we have in the house now.
Then you aren't talking about homeopathy. Dilution is the fundamental principle of homeopathy, if you remove that then you have something entirely different.
Spacemanvic wrote:Actually, raw milk is very tasty, and is great in milk shakes and hot chocolate (or cold).
It also contains probiotic bacteria and antimicrobial enzymes and is easier to digest. Plus, especially if you know the farmer, you know what the cow is eating. I prefer a free-grazing cow for both dairy and meat as opposed to an animal that is fed something that is as nutritional as cardboard. You want an evil corporation to rail against, you cant find a more vile and abusive company than one called Monsanto. Look them up.....
Yeah, we've seen the threads on them before, they're evil, they're in everything, they're changing their name to Umbrella soon....
Grey Templar wrote:
Unless you are actually allergic to gluten there is no good reason to avoid it, so my doctor tells me.
And WiFi allergy is just a mental thing. Its the same people who hire electricians to wrap all the wires in their houses with tinfoil so they don't cause brain interferance .
My dad's diabetes has come under better control since he cut gluten out and he uses far less insulin than he used to. I'm not allergic to gluten, gluten-free is just all we have in the house now.
Alot of illness can be maintained/cured via changes in our diet.
Then you aren't talking about homeopathy. Dilution is the fundamental principle of homeopathy, if you remove that then you have something entirely different.
Oh damn. Then I'll be dead soon and you wont have to read any more of my posts!! But then Ill proceed to haunting you.....
Alfndrate wrote: My dad's diabetes has come under better control since he cut gluten out and he uses far less insulin than he used to. I'm not allergic to gluten, gluten-free is just all we have in the house now.
That sounds more a like an effect of changing diet overall and not because gluten itself has a meaningful impact on diabetes. Post hoc fallacy, ect ect.
Alfndrate wrote: My dad's diabetes has come under better control since he cut gluten out and he uses far less insulin than he used to. I'm not allergic to gluten, gluten-free is just all we have in the house now.
That sounds more a like an effect of changing diet overall and not because gluten itself has a meaningful impact on diabetes. Post hoc fallacy, ect ect.
*sigh* does everything have to boil down to a fething fallacy with you? I swear that's one of a handful of things I ever see you post on this site.
I really don't give a fat frog's ass what fallacy you believe my experience is. I saw his insulin use before, I saw his insulin use after, I saw his insulin use while he was allowed to eat gluten, but not allowed to eat a variety of other things, I saw his insulin use while he wasn't allowed to eat gluten and while he wasn't allowed to eat a variety of things.
Spacemanvic wrote: Oh damn. Then I'll be dead soon and you wont have to read any more of my posts!! But then Ill proceed to haunting you.....
Of course you won't be. Using homeopathic "medicine" is completely harmless because it has no active ingredients. Eat/drink as much of it as you want, there are no possible health consequences. In fact, if you aren't drinking enough water, it might even be good for you. You're only in trouble if you use it instead of real medicine when you're sick with something that doesn't go away on its own.
(Now your wallet, on the other hand, may be dead soon if you keep spending money on scams.)
Alfndrate wrote: *sigh* does everything have to boil down to a fething fallacy with you? I swear that's one of a handful of things I ever see you post on this site.
This is why I'm putting you on ignore, because you don't know how to just talk. I'm not professing anything, I haven't given statistics, I haven't said that this is gospel. All I've said is that these are my experiences and what I've seen.
Alfndrate wrote: I really don't give a fat frog's ass what fallacy you believe my experience is. I saw his insulin use before, I saw his insulin use after, I saw his insulin use while he was allowed to eat gluten, but not allowed to eat a variety of other things, I saw his insulin use while he wasn't allowed to eat gluten and while he wasn't allowed to eat a variety of things.
And as you are a medical doctor or organic chemist I'm sure you made a detailed analysis of the systemic changes as well as cataloging any other dietary changes to come to that conclusion, or it is, as stated a post hoc fallacy and anecdotal evidence, which can never be used to supplant actual honest to god research. This is the same kind of reasoning that leads to thinking that vaccines cause autism.
How about setting up the insulin pump for a 68 year old man who can barely see every 3 days because the side effects from his diabetes are leaving him too blind to set up his pump accurately? How about now when we set it up it's once every 5 to 6 days? Does that give me a better leg up in this argument? No because again it's a fallacy and anecdotal evidence, blah blah blah.
How about I was in the doctor's office when this plan was being hashed out? I trust my dad's doctor, and I've seen the results
What the feth ever happened to just two people sitting down and sharing their experiences, and if one of those people ever hears something that they might think is fething bs they go and investigate it? Why does everything have to be backed up with studies, analysis, facts and charts by the person telling the story? I'm not making some massive medical claim, I'm simply saying, "here is my experience, it might be different than yours, but here is the way I've experienced the world. If this is something that might be relevant to your life, I suggest you also look into it so you can decide for yourself."
I have trouble understanding why one wouldn't want studies and research to back up saying that going gluten free helps with diabetes. I'm sure your family member has made improvements, but without more study just saying it was one part of the whole is why doesn't really help, and in many cases can be problematic to those with medical issues.
What the feth ever happened to just two people sitting down and sharing their experiences, and if one of those people ever hears something that they might think is fething bs they go and investigate it? Why does everything have to be backed up with studies, analysis, facts and charts by the person telling the story? I'm not making some massive medical claim, I'm simply saying, "here is my experience, it might be different than yours, but here is the way I've experienced the world. If this is something that might be relevant to your life, I suggest you also look into it so you can decide for yourself."
The internet happened. It's just Ahtman. Walk away and get a breath, and realize it's just bull gak. Not worth getting stressed out over.
Is it only if we agree with people that it becomes a discussion? I thought we were just people talking about issues, I didn't realize that by being skeptical of gluten fee being a diabetes treatment meant I was just being a meanie. Even someone else pointed out that changes in diet have an effect on overall health, so it may not just just be that he went gluten free but other factors as well, but I don't recall that leading to proclamations on the destruction of discourse.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective.
So is any other placebo. That doesn't mean that we should pretend that it's anything but a scam.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
Sorry, but if you think that homeopathy does anything then that casts serious doubt on your professional skills.
I don't know what got me thinking about osteopathy but that was not the term I had in my head. Sorry about that.
I was thinking more about different alternative therapies in general and not homeopathy. Some of the stuff like simple vitamins and minerals have been shown to be quite effective for different things. Probiotics are now used in hospitals on a regular basis. Different herbal remedies have also shown to be an effective adjunct to more conventional treatments.
If looking at the evidence and seeing that some of that stuff can help makes you doubt my clinical credibility, then you better stay out of hospitals because they are getting more frequent there.
What the feth ever happened to just two people sitting down and sharing their experiences, and if one of those people ever hears something that they might think is fething bs they go and investigate it? Why does everything have to be backed up with studies, analysis, facts and charts by the person telling the story? I'm not making some massive medical claim, I'm simply saying, "here is my experience, it might be different than yours, but here is the way I've experienced the world. If this is something that might be relevant to your life, I suggest you also look into it so you can decide for yourself."
The internet happened. It's just Ahtman. Walk away and get a breath, and realize it's just bull gak. Not worth getting stressed out over.
Done and done, grabbed a beer, cracked open a few sphess mahreens, and put on a new comedy album.
d-usa wrote: I was thinking more about different alternative therapies in general and not homeopathy. Some of the stuff like simple vitamins and minerals have been shown to be quite effective for different things. Probiotics are now used in hospitals on a regular basis. Different herbal remedies have also shown to be an effective adjunct to more conventional treatments.
Of course, that's an entirely different thing and legitimate medicine. Those treatments are held to the same standards as everyone else (proper trials, plausible mechanisms, etc) and are not at all like homeopathy. I have no objections to "alternative" methods that have been proven to work.
If looking at the evidence and seeing that some of that stuff can help makes you doubt my clinical credibility, then you better stay out of hospitals because they are getting more frequent there.
That was about homeopathy, which you have now clarified was a mistake. I certainly would not apply that statement to what you have now said.
Ahtman wrote: Is it only if we agree with people that it becomes a discussion? I thought we were just people talking about issues, I didn't realize that by being skeptical of gluten fee being a diabetes treatment meant I was just being a meanie. Even someone else pointed out that changes in diet have an effect on overall health, so it may not just just be that he went gluten free but other factors as well, but I don't recall that leading to proclamations on the destruction of discourse.
I would wager that the health change was because of the diet change and the gluten was simply a high profile scapegoat. Lots of things that don't have gluten are good for you.
But avoiding gluten for gluten's sake isn't what will help you, unless you are allergic to it.
Ahtman wrote: Is it only if we agree with people that it becomes a discussion? I thought we were just people talking about issues, I didn't realize that by being skeptical of gluten fee being a diabetes treatment meant I was just being a meanie. Even someone else pointed out that changes in diet have an effect on overall health, so it may not just just be that he went gluten free but other factors as well, but I don't recall that leading to proclamations on the destruction of discourse.
I would wager that the health change was because of the diet change and the gluten was simply a high profile scapegoat. Lots of things that don't have gluten are good for you.
But avoiding gluten for gluten's sake isn't what will help you, unless you are allergic to it.
Careful now, you are going to end up on an ignore list with unfriendly talk like that.
d-usa wrote: Yeah, I don't know how I got stuck on the homeopathy.
Alternative medicine can help, but it can also feth things up. Important thing is to always talk to your medical team.
Thats almost with anything though. My FIL went into the hospital due to complications with diabetes. Because of a foul up with two doctors who didnt look at his med records and both prescribing him meds that his records stated he should not take, he wound up in a coma and suffered organ failure before a nurse got involved and brought it to our attention, then we brought it to the family doctor who forwarded us to the patient advocate. By then it was too late, and we got to see him slowly and painfully die short of two weeks. Despite the family begging my MIL to sue the hospital to get their attention, she refused. This is a hospital with a reputation for shoddy care.
So yes, always talk with your medical team, always follow up, be actively involved and seek multiple approaches to a issue. We are lucky in that we have a doctor who is an MD as well as a homeopath.
Grey Templar wrote: There is a lot to be said for proper nutrition. If the homeopathy helps cover that it can be useful.
Some of the more potent forms of homeopathy, or so they claim, is so diluted that for there to be a single molecule of the original product in it, you'd need to fill a sphere the size of the inner solar system. Ever heard of Avogadro's Number?
As Tim Minchin said: alternative medicine is either medicine not proved to work, or proved not to work. You know what they call alternative medicine that works? Medicine.
And yes, let's be precise, natural remedies are not the same as homeopathy. The latter is only effective through th process of "succussing" and repetitive dilution. Aspirin is natural medicine. The difference is, there is an active ingredient in aspirin.
d-usa wrote: Yeah, I don't know how I got stuck on the homeopathy.
Alternative medicine can help, but it can also feth things up. Important thing is to always talk to your medical team.
Thats almost with anything though. My FIL went into the hospital due to complications with diabetes. Because of a foul up with two doctors who didnt look at his med records and both prescribing him meds that his records stated he should not take, he wound up in a coma and suffered organ failure before a nurse got involved and brought it to our attention, then we brought it to the family doctor who forwarded us to the patient advocate. By then it was too late, and we got to see him slowly and painfully die short of two weeks. Despite the family begging my MIL to sue the hospital to get their attention, she refused. This is a hospital with a reputation for shoddy care.
So yes, always talk with your medical team, always follow up, be actively involved and seek multiple approaches to a issue. We are lucky in that we have a doctor who is an MD as well as a homeopath.
Your anecdote does not discount the whole of modern medicine but speaks about two specific doctors. It does not allow anyone to draw any conclusion about anything else but those two doctors' competence.
Alfndrate wrote: My dad's diabetes has come under better control since he cut gluten out and he uses far less insulin than he used to. I'm not allergic to gluten, gluten-free is just all we have in the house now.
That sounds more a like an effect of changing diet overall and not because gluten itself has a meaningful impact on diabetes. Post hoc fallacy, ect ect.
*sigh* does everything have to boil down to a fething fallacy with you? I swear that's one of a handful of things I ever see you post on this site.
I really don't give a fat frog's ass what fallacy you believe my experience is. I saw his insulin use before, I saw his insulin use after, I saw his insulin use while he was allowed to eat gluten, but not allowed to eat a variety of other things, I saw his insulin use while he wasn't allowed to eat gluten and while he wasn't allowed to eat a variety of things.
What's the point of even being in a discussion if you can't even handle criticism and if people are finding fallacies in your posts you might want to look as to why that might be the case as it means you're likely using faulty reasoning.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective. Homeopathy can also hurt if it is not done correctly.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
I don't know, that would depend what "working in the medical field" is. The Reiki touch-healer at the local woo-factory uses that same phrase.
Homeopathy is not efficacious. It cannot be shown to be efficacious in trials. It has no credible mechanism of action. Tests of homeopathic tinctures and pills show that, statistically, there is almost certainly no active ingredient whatsoever in any particular dose. Homeopathy is directly responsible for thousands of deaths in Africa resulting from its advocates persuading people to stop taking clinically proven HIV-AIDS medications. It is a blight on humanity. "Alternative medicine" that demonstrably works is called "medicine", the rest is snakeoil.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective. Homeopathy can also hurt if it is not done correctly.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
I don't know, that would depend what "working in the medical field" is. The Reiki touch-healer at the local woo-factory uses that same phrase.
Homeopathy is not efficacious. It cannot be shown to be efficacious in trials. It has no credible mechanism of action. Tests of homeopathic tinctures and pills show that, statistically, there is almost certainly no active ingredient whatsoever in any particular dose. Homeopathy is directly responsible for thousands of deaths in Africa resulting from its advocates persuading people to stop taking clinically proven HIV-AIDS medications. It is a blight on humanity. "Alternative medicine" that demonstrably works is called "medicine", the rest is snakeoil.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective.
So is any other placebo. That doesn't mean that we should pretend that it's anything but a scam.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
Sorry, but if you think that homeopathy does anything then that casts serious doubt on your professional skills.
I don't know what got me thinking about osteopathy but that was not the term I had in my head. Sorry about that.
I was thinking more about different alternative therapies in general and not homeopathy. Some of the stuff like simple vitamins and minerals have been shown to be quite effective for different things. Probiotics are now used in hospitals on a regular basis. Different herbal remedies have also shown to be an effective adjunct to more conventional treatments.
Their selection of meats and produce is insane! Granted we don't usually buy much of the boxed items, just produce, meat and coffee (OH the wonderful COFFEE!).
Why not Publix? Everytime we're in Spring Hill, Publix seems to have really great meat.
My wife and I usually go to Publix for some things and Whole Foods for others. Unfortunately, the nearest Whole Foods is in Nashville.... At least where we are at, the prices in WF, for "fair trade" produce and even meat is equal to, or better than anything we get where we live. Publix does have some pretty good meat selection, but they dont have the variety, such as the various types of sausage, blends of ground meat, etc. Also absolutely love the seafood counter at WF, being from a coastal state, living in a landlocked one sucks.
I mean, yeah, sure you'll get the occasional horrible hipster/hippy type person in there, but where I'm at, the staff and customer service is at the same level as Publix (for those who dont have a Publix in their area, you're missing out), and maybe it's just nashville, but even the horrible hipster types are at least polite to your face.
Alfndrate wrote: My dad's diabetes has come under better control since he cut gluten out and he uses far less insulin than he used to. I'm not allergic to gluten, gluten-free is just all we have in the house now.
That sounds more a like an effect of changing diet overall and not because gluten itself has a meaningful impact on diabetes. Post hoc fallacy, ect ect.
*sigh* does everything have to boil down to a fething fallacy with you? I swear that's one of a handful of things I ever see you post on this site.
I really don't give a fat frog's ass what fallacy you believe my experience is. I saw his insulin use before, I saw his insulin use after, I saw his insulin use while he was allowed to eat gluten, but not allowed to eat a variety of other things, I saw his insulin use while he wasn't allowed to eat gluten and while he wasn't allowed to eat a variety of things.
I'm afraid your post is just a fallacy.
Seriously, good to hear about the weight improvement. Thats a serious issue for diabetics.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ahtman wrote: Someone doesn't have a sense of humor, it seems.
I have trouble understanding why one wouldn't want studies and research to back up saying that going gluten free helps with diabetes. I'm sure your family member has made improvements, but without more study just saying it was one part of the whole is why doesn't really help, and in many cases can be problematic to those with medical issues.
Gluten itself may (and probably is) irrelevant. Shifting away from breads and such however is directly beneficial, both to losing weight, and changing away from the carb/sugar probalems that can up a diabetic.
Cheesecat wrote: What's the point of even being in a discussion if you can't even handle criticism and if people are finding fallacies in your posts you might want to look as to why that might be the case as it means you're likely using faulty reasoning.
I've got little problem if someone says something along the lines of what Gray Templar said about gluten being a giant scapegoat for the entire thing and that my dad's health improvement can be attributed to a change in diet. What I have issue with is when someone just says, "this is a fallacy". That doesn't spur discussion that stunts it.
Grey Templar, while my dad's health has improved in other ways due to his dietary changes, my dad was on a strict regimented diet for several months in which his endocrinologist and his nutritionist did a battery of tests where they limited what he could eat for several weeks, and looked at his blood sugar and insulin use on a daily basis while he was limited to certain foods. During the time in which gluten (not just breads) were removed from his diet, they saw a decrease in insulin need as well as a lowering of his blood sugar highs. Gluten, being a protein, will raise anyone's blood sugar as it is, as that's how the body processes it and where goes after being processed (while the body is using it). Gluten in refined wheats (breads, pasta, starchy foods) tends to spike a diabetic's blood sugar needlessly and occasionally to dangerously high levels. While I'm not an expert on this subject, as one of my father's primary care givers (he's still independent, just a little lost without mom and I), I was there at all of his doctor's appointments and saw the test results and asked the doctors to explain these things to me so I knew what was going on. There was also a study done comparing a paleo diet to a Mediterranean-like diet. The largest difference between the two diets is the latter involves heavy reliance on unrefined grains (which tend to contain gluten). There wasn't a significant decrease for the diabetics on the paleo diet, but there was more of a decrease than with the Mediterranean-like diet. While it's not conclusive, it was something my dad and his doctors discussed as a way to help manage his diabetes, something he's been trying to keep under control for the past 49 years and has gotten worse in the past 5 to 6 years.
And Frazz, thanks yeah it's been cool seeing him slightly more active in the past year than I had since I started college.
I was thinking about this the other day, not Whole Foods or organic food in particular, just the modern ideas about gluten intolerance and lactose intolerance.
These certainly do exist as medical facts with scientific explanations, but OTOH wheat and milk have been core staples of the indo-European diet for thousands of years, so it is a bit surprising that these diseases have become common problems in the last few decades.
I assume that some third factor is involved. It has been suggested, for instance, that the modern growth of immune problems like nut allergy, is caused by the modern very clean lifestyle that does not allow infants' immune systems to be challenged and develop in a normal way.
I think some of it, though, is people wanting to have an interesting problem in their life. Like people who are allergic to WiFi.
Kilkrazy wrote: I was thinking about this the other day, not Whole Foods or organic food in particular, just the modern ideas about gluten intolerance and lactose intolerance.
These certainly do exist as medical facts with scientific explanations, but OTOH wheat and milk have been core staples of the indo-European diet for thousands of years, so it is a bit surprising that these diseases have become common problems in the last few decades.
I assume that some third factor is involved. It has been suggested, for instance, that the modern growth of immune problems like nut allergy, is caused by the modern very clean lifestyle that does not allow infants' immune systems to be challenged and develop in a normal way.
I think some of it, though, is people wanting to have an interesting problem in their life. Like people who are allergic to WiFi.
There's an old Lewis Black joke about how we know nothing about health, he then asks the audience if milk is good for us and gets a variety of answers. The joke then goes on about how scientists in New Zealand have determined that kids are drinking too much milk. and then proceeds to say something about what kid somewhere is a milk junkie.
There was something I learned way back in my 7th grade science class that humans are one of a small group of animals that drinks milk beyond infancy, and that drink the milk of another animal, and that humans grow more intolerant to lactose as they age. Now I've seen older people drink milk well into their 90s (the oldest man I know who was 96 the last time I saw him) had a bowl of cereal with 2% milk every morning while he worked at camp.
Frazzled wrote: I have special intolerance. I'm allergic to vegetables. I'm forced to eat burgers and Mexican food almost exclusively.
*gasp* no chili relleno? I'm so, so sorry Frazz.
mmm I love me some chili relleno, but none of the mexican places around here do it right, it's the one thing my parents truly miss about living in New Mexico and Texas.
I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure their was a reason we pastuerize our milk now. Since we live twice as long as we did 150 years ago, I think society maybe onto something.
Easy E wrote: I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure their was a reason we pastuerize our milk now. Since we live twice as long as we did 150 years ago, I think society maybe onto something.
But if you pasteurise it, you don't get all those scrumptious bacteria! (end sarcasm)
Honestly, there are some people who think anything a human has ever had any influence over instantly becomes deadly and evil. Sometimes we "meddle with nature" for a good reason!
And Wi-Fi allergies? I have to admire the cast iron 'nads of the guy who sold that one...
Cheesecat wrote: What's the point of even being in a discussion if you can't even handle criticism and if people are finding fallacies in your posts you might want to look as to why that might be the case as it means you're likely using faulty reasoning.
I've got little problem if someone says something along the lines of what Gray Templar said about gluten being a giant scapegoat for the entire thing and that my dad's health improvement can be attributed to a change in diet. What I have issue with is when someone just says, "this is a fallacy". That doesn't spur discussion that stunts it.
Grey Templar, while my dad's health has improved in other ways due to his dietary changes, my dad was on a strict regimented diet for several months in which his endocrinologist and his nutritionist did a battery of tests where they limited what he could eat for several weeks, and looked at his blood sugar and insulin use on a daily basis while he was limited to certain foods. During the time in which gluten (not just breads) were removed from his diet, they saw a decrease in insulin need as well as a lowering of his blood sugar highs. Gluten, being a protein, will raise anyone's blood sugar as it is, as that's how the body processes it and where goes after being processed (while the body is using it). Gluten in refined wheats (breads, pasta, starchy foods) tends to spike a diabetic's blood sugar needlessly and occasionally to dangerously high levels. While I'm not an expert on this subject, as one of my father's primary care givers (he's still independent, just a little lost without mom and I), I was there at all of his doctor's appointments and saw the test results and asked the doctors to explain these things to me so I knew what was going on. There was also a study done comparing a paleo diet to a Mediterranean-like diet. The largest difference between the two diets is the latter involves heavy reliance on unrefined grains (which tend to contain gluten). There wasn't a significant decrease for the diabetics on the paleo diet, but there was more of a decrease than with the Mediterranean-like diet. While it's not conclusive, it was something my dad and his doctors discussed as a way to help manage his diabetes, something he's been trying to keep under control for the past 49 years and has gotten worse in the past 5 to 6 years.
And Frazz, thanks yeah it's been cool seeing him slightly more active in the past year than I had since I started college.
Ok, maybe it did help.
I was really just pointing out that Gluten isn't the horrible thing health wackos claim it is, and most of the time any health benefits claimed to be associated with reducing it are really due to other changes in the diet and not specifically dropping the Gluten.
Since the closest Whole Foods is about 35 miles from my house, I've never been to one...the article was amusing though. We do have a local "health" grocery called Green Earth. I've been there a couple of times, and it's pretty cool...it's pricey, but they have some stuff that other stores don't have. Plus, they have a little kitchen where you can order lunch/dinner, and they use all the ingredients they have in-stock at the store.
As for gluten-free, I think it's kind of silly *unless* you have an allergy to it (Or other legit health-related reasons. like Alf's post). A good friend of mine has a gluten-allergy (on top of being lactose intolerant), and the worse part was that it went undiagnosed for YEARS. He's doing much better now, but his diet is just restrictive...he just lives off energy drinks and meat I just feel bad for him, since people normally bring food to our D&D sessions, and he can't eat most of it...
As for myself, I've cut red meats and dairy out of my regular diet, only eating on occasion. Between the healthier eating and being more active (walking to the store instead of driving, being involved in sports), I've lost almost 40 pounds. It's been great! Plus, the girlfriend went vegan after her galbladder was removed, so we've been focusing on making more healthier meals at home, and that's helped with the weight loss or better overall health.
Alfndrate wrote: I've got little problem if someone says something along the lines of what Gray Templar said about gluten being a giant scapegoat for the entire thing and that my dad's health improvement can be attributed to a change in diet. What I have issue with is when someone just says, "this is a fallacy". That doesn't spur discussion that stunts it.
I know you can't see this since you took your ball and went home, but that is not at all what happened. I said what the others have said, that it was likely there were others issues involved beyond just using gluten free, I just also had the unmitigated gall, the temerity, to try and share my reasoning for coming to that conclusion i.e. that it was a certain type of reasoning problem that plagues us all from time to time.
d-usa wrote: Yeah, I don't know how I got stuck on the homeopathy.
Alternative medicine can help, but it can also feth things up. Important thing is to always talk to your medical team.
Thats almost with anything though. My FIL went into the hospital due to complications with diabetes. Because of a foul up with two doctors who didnt look at his med records and both prescribing him meds that his records stated he should not take, he wound up in a coma and suffered organ failure before a nurse got involved and brought it to our attention, then we brought it to the family doctor who forwarded us to the patient advocate. By then it was too late, and we got to see him slowly and painfully die short of two weeks. Despite the family begging my MIL to sue the hospital to get their attention, she refused. This is a hospital with a reputation for shoddy care.
So yes, always talk with your medical team, always follow up, be actively involved and seek multiple approaches to a issue. We are lucky in that we have a doctor who is an MD as well as a homeopath.
Your anecdote does not discount the whole of modern medicine but speaks about two specific doctors. It does not allow anyone to draw any conclusion about anything else but those two doctors' competence.
I wasnt looking to discount modern medicine with my anecdote.
And the point I was making that you completely missed:
"So yes, always talk with your medical team, always follow up, be actively involved and seek multiple approaches to a issue.[u] "
Kilkrazy wrote: I was thinking about this the other day, not Whole Foods or organic food in particular, just the modern ideas about gluten intolerance and lactose intolerance.
These certainly do exist as medical facts with scientific explanations, but OTOH wheat and milk have been core staples of the indo-European diet for thousands of years, so it is a bit surprising that these diseases have become common problems in the last few decades.
I assume that some third factor is involved. It has been suggested, for instance, that the modern growth of immune problems like nut allergy, is caused by the modern very clean lifestyle that does not allow infants' immune systems to be challenged and develop in a normal way.
I think some of it, though, is people wanting to have an interesting problem in their life. Like people who are allergic to WiFi.
While I'm not a food chemical expert by any means, perhaps there are many different things that could be in your "third factor"
I agree with many of your theories, like the overly "clean" lifestyle. But what about things like GMO foods? or rBST (or whatever those 4 letters are in the bovine chemical for milk/cows)? The various dyes that Im *sure* went through a ton of government testing and the plethora of preservatives found in many food items that people in the US regularly get. Theres an article floating around on the interwebs that a friend of mine posted to her FB page about 10 different "food" items that were banned in other countries but are somewhat pushed here.
rBST is the hormone for cattle that induces milk production. the R stands for recumbent(ie: artificially produced)
rBST is chemically identical to the "natural" BST, its just by law you have to refer to it as rBST.
The supposed worry over it is that it could do to a human what it does to a cow, but that is chemically impossible even if you directly injected a person with it. Human ST is not even close to the chemical structure of BST(B stands for Bovine). You could drink a bottle of it. It could actually be good for you, nearly pure protein!
Not to mention it would be nearly impossible to get any from the milk itself. Only a microscopic amount can actually pass from the cow into the milk(often its undetectable). Then pasteurization would take its toll. And finally, any that made its way into the human digestive tract would first be assaulted by stomach acid before being broken down by digestive enzymes.
The only possible health problems that could be associated with rBST are those suffered by the cows themselves(which is little to none)
Using rBST is really just a farmer supplementing the cow's natural hormone cycle to get a little more milk production. its never done in quantities that would cause harm, because that would reduce productivity in the long run. And Dairies are having enough problems as it is with staying afloat, they can't afford to sabotage their herds long term productivity.
Its similar to you getting some Steroids after a surgery to jump start the healing process. This one just makes them produce a little more milk for a little longer.
SlaveToDorkness wrote: The article just seems like yet another subtle commentary inciting the class-war idea that everyone with more money than you is evil somehow.
No, it's mocking the corporatisation of feel good, middle class progressive values.
If you want to mock the disparity in income levels, you talk about the $1,000 hamburger with gold leaf on it. Making fun of Whole Foods is about mocking the middle class people that'll pay double the price for food when its got 'organic' on the label, despite not really knowing what organic actually means.
SlaveToDorkness wrote: The article just seems like yet another subtle commentary inciting the class-war idea that everyone with more money than you is evil somehow.
No, it's mocking the corporatisation of feel good, middle class progressive values.
If you want to mock the disparity in income levels, you talk about the $1,000 hamburger with gold leaf on it. Making fun of Whole Foods is about mocking the middle class people that'll pay double the price for food when its got 'organic' on the label, despite not really knowing what organic actually means.
Dont know how "organic" labels affect the price of your food Seb, but where I'm at, probably a good 80% of the food at my "local" whole foods is at the same price, or cheaper than the non-specialty grocers.
SlaveToDorkness wrote: The article just seems like yet another subtle commentary inciting the class-war idea that everyone with more money than you is evil somehow.
No, it's mocking the corporatisation of feel good, middle class progressive values.
If you want to mock the disparity in income levels, you talk about the $1,000 hamburger with gold leaf on it. Making fun of Whole Foods is about mocking the middle class people that'll pay double the price for food when its got 'organic' on the label, despite not really knowing what organic actually means.
to be fair, there was an aside about realizing that some people's dogs eat better than the author, which I suppose suggests some class awareness.
Although to some, class consciousness alone qualifies as "class warfare."
Automatically Appended Next Post: My favorite (and only) experience at a whole foods was at a wine/chocolate tasting event with a girl I was trying to sleep with (and never completely did), a friend and his relatively new wife, and a mutual friend. We ended up getting pasta at the little cafe, and the mutual friend inadvertently let slip that we went to a strip club for my buddy's bachelor party. My buddy, in true sitcom style, had apparently lied about going prior to the wedding.
Watching newlyweds get in a fight at whole foods while trying to get some from a vegetarian is one of the whitest things I've ever done.
Polonius wrote: My favorite (and only) experience at a whole foods was at a wine/chocolate tasting event with a girl I was trying to sleep with (and never completely did), a friend and his relatively new wife, and a mutual friend. We ended up getting pasta at the little cafe, and the mutual friend inadvertently let slip that we went to a strip club for my buddy's bachelor party. My buddy, in true sitcom style, had apparently lied about going prior to the wedding.
Watching newlyweds get in a fight at whole foods while trying to get some from a vegetarian is one of the whitest things I've ever done.
That and posting about it in the Off Topic section of a wargames site
My favorite (and only) experience at a whole foods was at a wine/chocolate tasting event with a girl I was trying to sleep with (and never completely did), a friend and his relatively new wife, and a mutual friend. We ended up getting pasta at the little cafe, and the mutual friend inadvertently let slip that we went to a strip club for my buddy's bachelor party. My buddy, in true sitcom style, had apparently lied about going prior to the wedding.
Watching newlyweds get in a fight at whole foods while trying to get some from a vegetarian is one of the whitest things I've ever done.
What do you mean by "completely " in this sentence?
Polonius wrote: My favorite (and only) experience at a whole foods was at a wine/chocolate tasting event with a girl I was trying to sleep with (and never completely did), a friend and his relatively new wife, and a mutual friend. We ended up getting pasta at the little cafe, and the mutual friend inadvertently let slip that we went to a strip club for my buddy's bachelor party. My buddy, in true sitcom style, had apparently lied about going prior to the wedding.
Watching newlyweds get in a fight at whole foods while trying to get some from a vegetarian is one of the whitest things I've ever done.
That and posting about it in the Off Topic section of a wargames site
I'm a second generation Federal employee with an advanced degree, a sensible sedan, and a blonde girlfriend. I love indie rock, artisan cheese, and craft beer. I embrace my whiteness.
My favorite (and only) experience at a whole foods was at a wine/chocolate tasting event with a girl I was trying to sleep with (and never completely did), a friend and his relatively new wife, and a mutual friend. We ended up getting pasta at the little cafe, and the mutual friend inadvertently let slip that we went to a strip club for my buddy's bachelor party. My buddy, in true sitcom style, had apparently lied about going prior to the wedding.
Watching newlyweds get in a fight at whole foods while trying to get some from a vegetarian is one of the whitest things I've ever done.
What do you mean by "completely " in this sentence?
Due to the family friendly nature of this site, I really can't get into details. Use your imagination!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
PhantomViper wrote: You know what? Never mind, I'm too afraid to know the answer so please ignore my previous post!
To be fair, the whole story involves a banana and Gold Bond Medicated powder.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Dont know how "organic" labels affect the price of your food Seb, but where I'm at, probably a good 80% of the food at my "local" whole foods is at the same price, or cheaper than the non-specialty grocers.
Organic labels are a premium pricing strategy. It's one of the more famous bits of food marketing of the last few decades. That 'organic' can considerably increase the price of a food item despite the term having no real meaning in most places is kind of famos.
But I'm not really all that interested in arguing about a nitpick in my original post. Pretend that throwaway line wasn't there if you want, and put in something about superfoods or some other piece of food nonsense if you want.
Polonius wrote: My favorite (and only) experience at a whole foods was at a wine/chocolate tasting event with a girl I was trying to sleep with (and never completely did), a friend and his relatively new wife, and a mutual friend. We ended up getting pasta at the little cafe, and the mutual friend inadvertently let slip that we went to a strip club for my buddy's bachelor party. My buddy, in true sitcom style, had apparently lied about going prior to the wedding.
Watching newlyweds get in a fight at whole foods while trying to get some from a vegetarian is one of the whitest things I've ever done.
That and posting about it in the Off Topic section of a wargames site
I'm a second generation Federal employee with an advanced degree, a sensible sedan, and a blonde girlfriend. I love indie rock, artisan cheese, and craft beer. I embrace my whiteness.
I'm white and Irish, so I practically glow in the dark
Polonius wrote: to be fair, there was an aside about realizing that some people's dogs eat better than the author, which I suppose suggests some class awareness.
Although to some, class consciousness alone qualifies as "class warfare."
True, but it is kind of interesting that just mocking where the middle class squander money can be so sensitive an issue that some people will see it as class warfare, even when its mocking the more left aligned middle class.
Polonius wrote: to be fair, there was an aside about realizing that some people's dogs eat better than the author, which I suppose suggests some class awareness.
Although to some, class consciousness alone qualifies as "class warfare."
True, but it is kind of interesting that just mocking where the middle class squander money can be so sensitive an issue that some people will see it as class warfare, even when its mocking the more left aligned middle class.
Well, I think it points out the uncomfortable truth that the upper classes don't want to get out: that higher taxes (which is what this always boils down to) wont' impoverish them. It will mean spending slightly less of luxury dog food.
I skip this aisle because I'm not rich enough to have dietary restrictions. Ever notice that you don't meet poor people with special diet needs? A gluten intolerant house cleaner? A cab driver with Candida?
Polonius wrote: Well, I think it points out the uncomfortable truth that the upper classes don't want to get out: that higher taxes (which is what this always boils down to) wont' impoverish them. It will mean spending slightly less of luxury dog food.
In most cases I doubt that would even change. Once you get to a certain income the basics just don't matter - which is why people buy premium groceries that are generally no different than the better quality mid-range stuff - when you're a family with two six figure incomes dog food just can't impact your bank balance no matter how extravagant it gets.
The house payments, boat payments, and upgrading to the new model Lexus every few years - that's where the money goes. Even doubling the monthly grocery can't be the problem.
I was talking to a friend who's not doing great in their finances, despite her husband earning an income around 150k. She told me they were doing things to save - like buying a yoghurt maker. Seriously. Two luxury cars, a boat, and a mortgage not too far from a million dollars, and she thinks the yoghurt is where the money is going.
Unsurprisingly, they are also pretty adamantly opposed to an increase in income taxes...
Polonius wrote: Well, I think it points out the uncomfortable truth that the upper classes don't want to get out: that higher taxes (which is what this always boils down to) wont' impoverish them. It will mean spending slightly less of luxury dog food.
In most cases I doubt that would even change. Once you get to a certain income the basics just don't matter - which is why people buy premium groceries that are generally no different than the better quality mid-range stuff - when you're a family with two six figure incomes dog food just can't impact your bank balance no matter how extravagant it gets.
The house payments, boat payments, and upgrading to the new model Lexus every few years - that's where the money goes. Even doubling the monthly grocery can't be the problem.
I was talking to a friend who's not doing great in their finances, despite her husband earning an income around 150k. She told me they were doing things to save - like buying a yoghurt maker. Seriously. Two luxury cars, a boat, and a mortgage not too far from a million dollars, and she thinks the yoghurt is where the money is going.
Unsurprisingly, they are also pretty adamantly opposed to an increase in income taxes...
We all live extravagantly relative to some other group sebster, and shouldn't be so eager in raising the group above our's taxes.
As someone that has cut gluten out of my diet for legitimate reasons*, neurotic rich white yuppies that won't eat gluten due to the advice of nutso "health experts" really piss me off. They have absolutely no reason to do it, and yet they persist in their self-delusion, making everyone else that actually have sensitivities to it, from the mild to people with celiac disease, look like trendy fools. The only people that take it seriously any more are companies looking to cash in on a trend.
~Tim?
*Turns out that gluten, or the substances usually found alongside it, had been causing/aggravating the nasty, deep, and painful zits that I had to deal with for years. Now I just get blackheads and "regular" acne, which nothing has been able to dislodge. And yes, I shower every day.
Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote: As someone that has cut gluten out of my diet for legitimate reasons*, neurotic rich white yuppies that won't eat gluten due to the advice of nutso "health experts" really piss me off. They have absolutely no reason to do it, and yet they persist in their self-delusion, making everyone else that actually have sensitivities to it, from the mild to people with celiac disease, look like trendy fools. The only people that take it seriously any more are companies looking to cash in on a trend.
~Tim?
*Turns out that gluten, or the substances usually found alongside it, had been causing/aggravating the nasty, deep, and painful zits that I had to deal with for years. Now I just get blackheads and "regular" acne, which nothing has been able to dislodge. And yes, I shower every day.
To be fair, the one nice thing trends like this actually will do for you is make the food overall cheaper and readily available. If they're "popular", more people will carry them.
Polonius wrote: to be fair, there was an aside about realizing that some people's dogs eat better than the author, which I suppose suggests some class awareness.
Although to some, class consciousness alone qualifies as "class warfare."
True, but it is kind of interesting that just mocking where the middle class squander money can be so sensitive an issue that some people will see it as class warfare, even when its mocking the more left aligned middle class.
Well, I think it points out the uncomfortable truth that the upper classes don't want to get out: that higher taxes (which is what this always boils down to) wont' impoverish them. It will mean spending slightly less of luxury dog food.
Fair point.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cincydooley wrote: So we were at a donut shop the other day at around 8PM, and as we're picking ours out, I hear, "Do you have anything gluten free."
Sure enough, it was a skinny white girl with a Burberry scarf on. I couldn't help buy laugh on the inside.
surixurient wrote: We all live extravagantly relative to some other group sebster, and shouldn't be so eager in raising the group above our's taxes.
If they aren't paying enough we should. I'd be happy to go back to the Reagan era tax rates.
If they aren't paying enough huh? How about if you aren't paying enough? Whose to say who is pulling their weight?
Well, it's complicated. Wealth, of course, is relative. A person on food stamps and section 8 in East Cleveland today is incredibly wealthy compared to a person in an African slum. Or a harlem tenement 100 years ago.
One of the ways we look at it is to look at disposable income. That is, you look at a persons income and family size, and take away essentials like food, rent (or mortgage), car, etc. And you look at how that remainder is spent. A family with no remainder should, in theory, pay little tax (and in practice rarely does, see the infamous 47%). A family that has money for a vacation and nicer house pays some. A family with luxury cars and private school for kids pays more. Etc.
You can tell about a person's financial status by the decisions he has to make. For me, my choices are really between a nicer apartment and building my IRA. I'm clearly doing pretty well. My friend, who doesn't have student loan payments and makes more, was wondering what country to visit on vacation, or if he should buy a new car a year earlier. He's doing a bit better. My roommate has to pick between saving for a new car (because credit is not an option) and paying off old debts. He's doing not so great.
I could pay more in taxes. It would come out of my entertainment and eating out budget, but I could do it. And I already pay a lot of federal income taxes. But, you know, I can afford it more than most, and others can afford it more than me.
Due to high unemployment, taxing the poor won't accomplish much. Minimum wage shakes out around $13,000 a year, so I don't know how much we can take out. Middle Class wages have stayed stagnant or receded in real dollars for about 20 years, so raising taxes on the middle class is touchy (either with higher rates or eliminating many deductions). Of course, high earners have seen their incomes rise dramatically. They already pay more, but they're the only ones rich now. So, they should pay even more.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective. Homeopathy can also hurt if it is not done correctly.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
I don't know, that would depend what "working in the medical field" is. The Reiki touch-healer at the local woo-factory uses that same phrase.
Homeopathy is not efficacious. It cannot be shown to be efficacious in trials. It has no credible mechanism of action. Tests of homeopathic tinctures and pills show that, statistically, there is almost certainly no active ingredient whatsoever in any particular dose. Homeopathy is directly responsible for thousands of deaths in Africa resulting from its advocates persuading people to stop taking clinically proven HIV-AIDS medications. It is a blight on humanity. "Alternative medicine" that demonstrably works is called "medicine", the rest is snakeoil.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective.
So is any other placebo. That doesn't mean that we should pretend that it's anything but a scam.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
Sorry, but if you think that homeopathy does anything then that casts serious doubt on your professional skills.
I don't know what got me thinking about osteopathy but that was not the term I had in my head. Sorry about that.
I was thinking more about different alternative therapies in general and not homeopathy. Some of the stuff like simple vitamins and minerals have been shown to be quite effective for different things. Probiotics are now used in hospitals on a regular basis. Different herbal remedies have also shown to be an effective adjunct to more conventional treatments.
Yep, my bad, I need to get into the habit of finishing the thread before I do the whole "SELF RIGHTEOUS MODE: ACTIVATE!" shtick
EDIT: OK, I finished the thread this time - SELF RIGHTEOUS MODE: ACTIVATE
Kilkrazy wrote: I was thinking about this the other day, not Whole Foods or organic food in particular, just the modern ideas about gluten intolerance and lactose intolerance.
These certainly do exist as medical facts with scientific explanations, but OTOH wheat and milk have been core staples of the indo-European diet for thousands of years, so it is a bit surprising that these diseases have become common problems in the last few decades.
I assume that some third factor is involved. It has been suggested, for instance, that the modern growth of immune problems like nut allergy, is caused by the modern very clean lifestyle that does not allow infants' immune systems to be challenged and develop in a normal way.
I think some of it, though, is people wanting to have an interesting problem in their life. Like people who are allergic to WiFi.
While I'm not a food chemical expert by any means, perhaps there are many different things that could be in your "third factor"
I agree with many of your theories, like the overly "clean" lifestyle.But what about things like GMO foods? or rBST (or whatever those 4 letters are in the bovine chemical for milk/cows)? The various dyes that Im *sure* went through a ton of government testing and the plethora of preservatives found in many food items that people in the US regularly get. Theres an article floating around on the interwebs that a friend of mine posted to her FB page about 10 different "food" items that were banned in other countries but are somewhat pushed here.
Emphasis mine. I don't like where this is going, because that phrase, "what about things like GMO foods?", doesn't usually bode well.
GM foods are perfectly safe for human consumption. Everything we eat today is based on "modified" food; compare "natural" wheat or corn to the stuff that grows on a "certified Organic" farm sometime. We've been crossbreeding strains of plants to achieve more resistant crops with better climactic adaptation and higher yields for centuries now; the humble banana used to be a bitter, unpleasant fist-shaped lump with huge black pips in it until we got our hands on it. All we're doing by using modern methods of GM is skipping the need for decades of crossbreeding, as well as allowing us access to traits contained in plants we couldn't previously combine. If you take a gene from a tomato plant(or anything else) and splice it into a potato plant to make the latter more resistant to a disease, you don't suddenly change how the human body digests and absorbs nutrients from food, but you may well find you've made it substantially less necessary to douse the potato plants in chemical fungicides on a regular basis.
The issues with GM foods are issues of corporate corruption and draconian overreaching intellectual property laws, not food safety, and focusing on the misinformation spread about by that particular brand of consumer that is essentially a walking talking embodiment of the "appeal to nature" fallacy actually ends up serving the interests of those corrupt corporations, because governments well know that GM foods are necessary to the continuing survival of humanity and so will never ban them, and meanwhile the corporations are able to drown out any criticism of their business practices by lumping those kinds of legitimate issues in with the hemp-wearing tie-dye organic-loving "Frankenfoods" foolishness.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective. Homeopathy can also hurt if it is not done correctly.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
I don't know, that would depend what "working in the medical field" is. The Reiki touch-healer at the local woo-factory uses that same phrase.
Homeopathy is not efficacious. It cannot be shown to be efficacious in trials. It has no credible mechanism of action. Tests of homeopathic tinctures and pills show that, statistically, there is almost certainly no active ingredient whatsoever in any particular dose. Homeopathy is directly responsible for thousands of deaths in Africa resulting from its advocates persuading people to stop taking clinically proven HIV-AIDS medications. It is a blight on humanity. "Alternative medicine" that demonstrably works is called "medicine", the rest is snakeoil.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective.
So is any other placebo. That doesn't mean that we should pretend that it's anything but a scam.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
Sorry, but if you think that homeopathy does anything then that casts serious doubt on your professional skills.
I don't know what got me thinking about osteopathy but that was not the term I had in my head. Sorry about that.
I was thinking more about different alternative therapies in general and not homeopathy. Some of the stuff like simple vitamins and minerals have been shown to be quite effective for different things. Probiotics are now used in hospitals on a regular basis. Different herbal remedies have also shown to be an effective adjunct to more conventional treatments.
Yep, my bad, I need to get into the habit of finishing the thread before I do the whole "SELF RIGHTEOUS MODE: ACTIVATE!" shtick
If homeopathic remedies never work, and are just serious wastes of money, then why do they have a place in various country's medical systems?
When I was stationed in Germany, my wife and I had a couple German Doctors who, if one of us had a mild case of something, usually the first thing to try briefly, was a herbal or homeopathic remedy... I think that the theory here being that, most people THINK they have something serious, and go see a doc, the doc in turn may simply see a high level of stress, "prescribe" a homeopathic/herbal solution for stress, tell them to try it for their issue and see if it worked. Obviously, there are cases where actual medicine with it's crazy side effects are warranted, but here in the US those cases are 100% of the time.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective. Homeopathy can also hurt if it is not done correctly.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
I don't know, that would depend what "working in the medical field" is. The Reiki touch-healer at the local woo-factory uses that same phrase.
Homeopathy is not efficacious. It cannot be shown to be efficacious in trials. It has no credible mechanism of action. Tests of homeopathic tinctures and pills show that, statistically, there is almost certainly no active ingredient whatsoever in any particular dose. Homeopathy is directly responsible for thousands of deaths in Africa resulting from its advocates persuading people to stop taking clinically proven HIV-AIDS medications. It is a blight on humanity. "Alternative medicine" that demonstrably works is called "medicine", the rest is snakeoil.
d-usa wrote: Homeopathy, as a part of a complete medical regimen, is helpful and effective.
So is any other placebo. That doesn't mean that we should pretend that it's anything but a scam.
Of course I'm just a person working in the medical field, what do I know.
Sorry, but if you think that homeopathy does anything then that casts serious doubt on your professional skills.
I don't know what got me thinking about osteopathy but that was not the term I had in my head. Sorry about that.
I was thinking more about different alternative therapies in general and not homeopathy. Some of the stuff like simple vitamins and minerals have been shown to be quite effective for different things. Probiotics are now used in hospitals on a regular basis. Different herbal remedies have also shown to be an effective adjunct to more conventional treatments.
Yep, my bad, I need to get into the habit of finishing the thread before I do the whole "SELF RIGHTEOUS MODE: ACTIVATE!" shtick
If homeopathic remedies never work, and are just serious wastes of money, then why do they have a place in various country's medical systems?
If curing illness by trepanning the skull to allow the evil illness-causing daemons out never works, then why was it such a popular medical procedure among respected doctors for so long?
If bleeding the patient using leeches or needles in order to rebalance their humours and biles to cure their illness never worked.....
If giving people tinctures of mercury to cure their STDs never worked.....
Human beings are extremely easy to mislead; our ability to recognise patterns and extrapolate from them is doubtless extremely advantageous, but it also leaves us vulnerable to attributing significance to events totally unrelated to the question at hand. That's why we devised the scientific method. Homeopathic nonsense has a place in many nations' medical systems because politicians are cowards too afraid to tell people that their personal beliefs are contrary to reality, and in most cases that's perfectly harmless and fine, but not when it comes to healthcare.
When I was stationed in Germany, my wife and I had a couple German Doctors who, if one of us had a mild case of something, usually the first thing to try briefly, was a herbal or homeopathic remedy... I think that the theory here being that, most people THINK they have something serious, and go see a doc, the doc in turn may simply see a high level of stress, "prescribe" a homeopathic/herbal solution for stress, tell them to try it for their issue and see if it worked. Obviously, there are cases where actual medicine with it's crazy side effects are warranted, but here in the US those cases are 100% of the time.
Three things.
1. Equating homeopathy -ie the process of using a mystical ritual(which is what it is, regardless of how often its practitioners try to legimitise the practice by using rational-sounding terms like "process") to repeatedly dilute the original ingredient with water until, statistically speaking, there is not a single molecule of active ingredient left in the solution- with medicinal herbs is not advisable. A lot of "herbal remedies" are bunk, certainly, but not all of them, lots of herbal remedies are where we originally discovered the chemical compounds that form the basis for modern drugs afterall.
2. It's worth remembering that those lists of "crazy side effects" you see on packaging and in adverts are simply a list of every single negative effect experienced by people during the clinical trials, in any amount. If two people in a 10,000-person study get a rash while testing Examploflex tablets, then "rash" goes on the list on the packet, by law. Many medications do indeed have substantial side effects, but for the vast, vast, vast majority of people the disease is most definitely worse than the cure.
3. It is widely accepted that prescribing patients a placebo is ludicrously unethical in any situation outside of a clinical trial. Even if homeopathic remedies could be shown to be more effective than a conventional sugar pill(which they can't be, because that's what homeopathic tablets are; sugar pills), it would still be wrong for a doctor to prescribe that to a patient as a treatment when they know for a fact it will have no effect. If people are stressed, they need to be given genuine advice on how to manage their situation, or proper medication if they develop a genuine diagnosable anxiety disorder, not sugar pills-by-another-name and a pat on the head. The two main problems with the modern medical system are a lack of time for doctors to engage with patients and explain things to/comfort them, and a pathological cowardice on the part of doctors to actually use the authority of their knowledge to tell patients to "stop whinging, go home, drink plenty of fluids, and come back if you're not better in a few days" instead of immediately reaching for the prescription book and loading them up on antibiotics or homeopathy or whatever else.
The problem with the homeopathic medicine world is that a lot of it is pure quackery, and as a result, the small fractions of homeopathic remedies that do work (swedish bitters for taking down inflammation from acne/cold sores, for example) have their reputations completely overshadowed by the generations upon generations of snakeoil peddlers, from now back to ancient times.
So, Yohdrin, if homeopathic is not the correct word to use for taking herbs and/or more "natural" means of fighting infections/illness, then what is the proper term for it?
Obviously, I am trying to keep this in the realm of things that actually do work (and ironically, leeches have begun to come back for certain sicknesses, but are completely clean and sort of lab grown)
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Dont know how "organic" labels affect the price of your food Seb, but where I'm at, probably a good 80% of the food at my "local" whole foods is at the same price, or cheaper than the non-specialty grocers.
Organic labels are a premium pricing strategy. It's one of the more famous bits of food marketing of the last few decades. That 'organic' can considerably increase the price of a food item despite the term having no real meaning in most places is kind of famos.
But I'm not really all that interested in arguing about a nitpick in my original post. Pretend that throwaway line wasn't there if you want, and put in something about superfoods or some other piece of food nonsense if you want.
Overheat,Atleast, Organic is thought to be better for the environment aswell. But that is only true for family farms(BUY LOCAL) if you buy from the supermarket it is quite likely from a horrible farm with the same practices as others. Likee setting crops on fire in the midden of the field to prevent spread, "Organic PEsticides". Organic label is very lax.
That said, I prefer Organic from the lcal farmers market out of principle. I dont think there is anything wrong from GM except the laws surrounding them
Ensis Ferrae wrote: So, Yohdrin, if homeopathic is not the correct word to use for taking herbs and/or more "natural" means of fighting infections/illness, then what is the proper term for it?
Obviously, I am trying to keep this in the realm of things that actually do work (and ironically, leeches have begun to come back for certain sicknesses, but are completely clean and sort of lab grown)
Herbal Remedies is the term you tend to see on their packaging around here, and that's a term I'd be happy to see legally defined and enforced through regulation in order that it includes only those things with a measurable effect and excludes all the snake-oil. Unfortunately, just like "big pharma", the "all natural" health market is worth a lot of cash(a large proportion of all the homeopathic remedies on sale in the UK, for example, are made by one massive multi-billion-pound French corporation), and the businesses involved know well that their interests lie in maintaining a zone of regulatory and evidential uncertainty within which they can cultivate their brands around the "appeal to nature" concept in their marketing.
Any such legal framework would also have to be crafted extremely carefully and be combined with an extensive public information campaign, because the last thing we need is such a move legitimising anti-vax idiocy or any of other other woo that clings to the edges of the "natural medicine" idea.
Kilkrazy wrote: I was thinking about this the other day, not Whole Foods or organic food in particular, just the modern ideas about gluten intolerance and lactose intolerance.
These certainly do exist as medical facts with scientific explanations, but OTOH wheat and milk have been core staples of the indo-European diet for thousands of years, so it is a bit surprising that these diseases have become common problems in the last few decades.
I assume that some third factor is involved. It has been suggested, for instance, that the modern growth of immune problems like nut allergy, is caused by the modern very clean lifestyle that does not allow infants' immune systems to be challenged and develop in a normal way.
I think some of it, though, is people wanting to have an interesting problem in their life. Like people who are allergic to WiFi.
There's an old Lewis Black joke about how we know nothing about health, he then asks the audience if milk is good for us and gets a variety of answers. The joke then goes on about how scientists in New Zealand have determined that kids are drinking too much milk. and then proceeds to say something about what kid somewhere is a milk junkie.
There was something I learned way back in my 7th grade science class that humans are one of a small group of animals that drinks milk beyond infancy, and that drink the milk of another animal, and that humans grow more intolerant to lactose as they age. Now I've seen older people drink milk well into their 90s (the oldest man I know who was 96 the last time I saw him) had a bowl of cereal with 2% milk every morning while he worked at camp.
Health is different for everyone
Yup. Different cultures who do not consume as much milk have a higher percentage of lactose intolerance because it never was a deciding factor, evolutionnarily, for them to make sure they used milk as a source of protein and carbs. Most adults will shut down lactase production if they forego from milk products for a while. They'll start up again, but it'll take a bit and the first few doses will be harder to digest. I for one need my chocolate milk after I run. It's just my thing. And Quebecer's blood is part-poutine, so cheese curds are in our DNA, you could say.
While gluten is certainly not necessary for survival (it can easily replaced by other proteins) it arguably did a lot to facilitate long distance travel, at the dawn of human civilization. We've had it in our food for a long, long time and it's just part of so many cultures. Can you say French without baguette? Italian without pasta? It's a conscious choice. One that may make sense for some people, not for many. I find it objectionnable when others vocalize their judgement of my eating habits as if their choices were the best for everyone. Which I don,t think Alf did here, just so no one thinks I am accusing him of.
I think some of us are getting tired of "fad" diets, because that's what most of them end up being, and a lot of people seem not to realize this when they are actively proselytizing to the hoi polloi. Sorry if I'm late to the party, it was a crazy day at work.
Ensis Ferrae wrote: So, Yohdrin, if homeopathic is not the correct word to use for taking herbs and/or more "natural" means of fighting infections/illness, then what is the proper term for it?
Obviously, I am trying to keep this in the realm of things that actually do work (and ironically, leeches have begun to come back for certain sicknesses, but are completely clean and sort of lab grown)
Herbal Remedies is the term you tend to see on their packaging around here, and that's a term I'd be happy to see legally defined and enforced through regulation in order that it includes only those things with a measurable effect and excludes all the snake-oil. Unfortunately, just like "big pharma", the "all natural" health market is worth a lot of cash(a large proportion of all the homeopathic remedies on sale in the UK, for example, are made by one massive multi-billion-pound French corporation), and the businesses involved know well that their interests lie in maintaining a zone of regulatory and evidential uncertainty within which they can cultivate their brands around the "appeal to nature" concept in their marketing.
Any such legal framework would also have to be crafted extremely carefully and be combined with an extensive public information campaign, because the last thing we need is such a move legitimising anti-vax idiocy or any of other other woo that clings to the edges of the "natural medicine" idea.
And the worse part is, no one, to my knowledge, has ever denied that nature is the greatest inspiration for medicinal compounds used as remedies. Sure some stuff is completely synthesized, I guess, but nature was the inspiration. Homeopathy is about extreme dilutions and water memory, and nothing else. If you do not believe in that, then you don't believe in homeopathy. Boiron sells oscillococcinum to the tune of millions every year, out of a single duck's liver. Anecdote: I spent a miserable summer waiting for Saballia to kick in for my allergies. The instruction on the box said to take 4 tablets every hour until relief occured. To my allergy addled mind, it just meant, buy as many as you can while hay fever is going on, please? And buy them my parents did...
surixurient wrote: We all live extravagantly relative to some other group sebster, and shouldn't be so eager in raising the group above our's taxes.
First up, you've probably made an assumption about my own household income that isn't true. Second of all, my point had nothing to do with extravagance meaning someone somewhere 'should' pay more tax. My point was on the ridiculous nature of claims made by wealthier people that higher taxes would put greater pressure on their incomes.
To clarifty, if a guy with an upper middle class income says that tax increases shouldn't fall on him because he personally doesn't want to pay more, and would prefer to continue upgrading his luxury car every few years, that's a fair comment. Whether other people agree or not is up to them.
But if that person says that tax increases shouldn't fall on him because he can't afford to pay more, he's either lying, has terrible budgeting skills, or most likely some combination of the two.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
hotsauceman1 wrote: Overheat,Atleast, Organic is thought to be better for the environment aswell. But that is only true for family farms(BUY LOCAL) if you buy from the supermarket it is quite likely from a horrible farm with the same practices as others. Likee setting crops on fire in the midden of the field to prevent spread, "Organic PEsticides". Organic label is very lax.
That said, I prefer Organic from the lcal farmers market out of principle. I dont think there is anything wrong from GM except the laws surrounding them
Yeah, absolutely. Stuff bought direct from farmers, at farmer's markets and the like - great stuff. We've got a local market that sets up every Sunday and the fresh produce is awesome.
But a jar in a store with 'organic' written on it- that could mean anything, and most likely means nothing other than a marketing position taken by the retailer.
What annoys me is how difficult it is to "grow your own" in the city. I've been trying for two years now to set up my own hydroponic garden, but have been foiled at every turn. The local council refuse to allow me to set one up in an allotment even if I could get one, because apparently that would be "wasting" space that someone else could use to grow things the "proper"(read: old fashioned, inefficient) way.
I tried setting one up in my tenement's communal back green, but the wee coven of mercilessly negative and whinging pensioners that believe they run the place ruined that idea.
Not to mention that it's virtually impossible to get your hands on the latest GMO seeds that are engineered to be better suited for hydroponic growth with artificial light as a member of the public.
It's so frustrating; with one old shipping container, some hydro equipment and the right seeds, I could be producing vegetables to feed several families for almost nothing in terms of cost -I mean literally so cheap I could afford to give them away- and with very little effort. But nooo, "it's an eyesore", "allotments are for people to grow things properly", "I'm a cretinous luddite that thinks computers are magical boxes run by faeries and your fancy techno-farm terrifies my tiny little mind"
Yodhrin wrote: What annoys me is how difficult it is to "grow your own" in the city. I've been trying for two years now to set up my own hydroponic garden, but have been foiled at every turn. The local council refuse to allow me to set one up in an allotment even if I could get one, because apparently that would be "wasting" space that someone else could use to grow things the "proper"(read: old fashioned, inefficient) way.
I tried setting one up in my tenement's communal back green, but the wee coven of mercilessly negative and whinging pensioners that believe they run the place ruined that idea.
Not to mention that it's virtually impossible to get your hands on the latest GMO seeds that are engineered to be better suited for hydroponic growth with artificial light as a member of the public.
It's so frustrating; with one old shipping container, some hydro equipment and the right seeds, I could be producing vegetables to feed several families for almost nothing in terms of cost -I mean literally so cheap I could afford to give them away- and with very little effort. But nooo, "it's an eyesore", "allotments are for people to grow things properly", "I'm a cretinous luddite that thinks computers are magical boxes run by faeries and your fancy techno-farm terrifies my tiny little mind"
Why do you need permits? Its not even a farm or garden. Its just potted plants with a really intense watering schedule.
Yodhrin wrote: What annoys me is how difficult it is to "grow your own" in the city. I've been trying for two years now to set up my own hydroponic garden, but have been foiled at every turn. The local council refuse to allow me to set one up in an allotment even if I could get one, because apparently that would be "wasting" space that someone else could use to grow things the "proper"(read: old fashioned, inefficient) way.
I tried setting one up in my tenement's communal back green, but the wee coven of mercilessly negative and whinging pensioners that believe they run the place ruined that idea.
Not to mention that it's virtually impossible to get your hands on the latest GMO seeds that are engineered to be better suited for hydroponic growth with artificial light as a member of the public.
It's so frustrating; with one old shipping container, some hydro equipment and the right seeds, I could be producing vegetables to feed several families for almost nothing in terms of cost -I mean literally so cheap I could afford to give them away- and with very little effort. But nooo, "it's an eyesore", "allotments are for people to grow things properly", "I'm a cretinous luddite that thinks computers are magical boxes run by faeries and your fancy techno-farm terrifies my tiny little mind"
Why do you need permits? Its not even a farm or garden. Its just potted plants with a really intense watering schedule.
The allotments are actually owned by the council, they just assign you a small plot of land if you want one and there are some free, so they get final say on what you put there. The back green is communally owned by all the couple of hundred flats in the tenement block, and you need planning permission to put "large powered structures" in gardens, which combines to mean that if even a handful of people who live in the tenement block object to the council when you apply, they block you. Anyway, before long I'll either have the job I want and thus enough money to escape these misanthropic old hags, or they'll have died off and ceased to be a problem anyway
The allotments are actually owned by the council, they just assign you a small plot of land if you want one and there are some free, so they get final say on what you put there. The back green is communally owned by all the couple of hundred flats in the tenement block, and you need planning permission to put "large powered structures" in gardens, which combines to mean that if even a handful of people who live in the tenement block object to the council when you apply, they block you. Anyway, before long I'll either have the job I want and thus enough money to escape these misanthropic old hags, or they'll have died off and ceased to be a problem anyway
We have a local plot a few blocks south of me that's just a community "grow" plot. Not sure what you have to do to get into it, but it's basically just little old ladies' flowers and a few of the local hippie types growing their own potatoes and veggies. I suspect they're not quite as uptight though, but that's mostly just based on out laid back the atmosphere in general is here.
Yodhrin wrote: The allotments are actually owned by the council, they just assign you a small plot of land if you want one and there are some free, so they get final say on what you put there. The back green is communally owned by all the couple of hundred flats in the tenement block, and you need planning permission to put "large powered structures" in gardens, which combines to mean that if even a handful of people who live in the tenement block object to the council when you apply, they block you. Anyway, before long I'll either have the job I want and thus enough money to escape these misanthropic old hags, or they'll have died off and ceased to be a problem anyway
My wife and I have been growing our own veggies for a while now and plan on getting chickens in the Spring for fresh eggs. This year we've grown;
- potatoes
- tomatoes
- peppers
- strawberries
- zucchini
- asparagus
- Brussels sprouts
- peas
- radishes
- various herbs (chives, cilantro, basil, lemon balm)
We also planted an apple tree, pear tree, and plum tree, as well as dwarf lemon, lime, and orange trees but they'll all take some years to produce fruit
I wish I had space for such things. I have been considering an herb garden, but it's really the donkey end of the grow season so I doubt I'll have much to go on there.
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I wish I had space for such things. I have been considering an herb garden, but it's really the donkey end of the grow season so I doubt I'll have much to go on there.
There's more than a handful of winter herbs, depending upon your climate.
Yodhrin wrote: The allotments are actually owned by the council, they just assign you a small plot of land if you want one and there are some free, so they get final say on what you put there. The back green is communally owned by all the couple of hundred flats in the tenement block, and you need planning permission to put "large powered structures" in gardens, which combines to mean that if even a handful of people who live in the tenement block object to the council when you apply, they block you. Anyway, before long I'll either have the job I want and thus enough money to escape these misanthropic old hags, or they'll have died off and ceased to be a problem anyway
My wife and I have been growing our own veggies for a while now and plan on getting chickens in the Spring for fresh eggs. This year we've grown;
- potatoes
- tomatoes
- peppers
- strawberries
- zucchini
- asparagus
- Brussels sprouts
- peas
- radishes
- various herbs (chives, cilantro, basil, lemon balm)
We also planted an apple tree, pear tree, and plum tree, as well as dwarf lemon, lime, and orange trees but they'll all take some years to produce fruit
Feed those chickens good quality feed and you'll get eggs like you wouldn't believe. After having a fresh egg from your own chickens, with rich, deeply colored yolk and firm whites, you'll never be able to go back to those wussy supermarket eggs with their watery, pale, tasteless yolks.
We grow some herbs as well, along with potatoes, lettuce, peppers, tomatoes, strawberries, asparagus, melons, and a handful of other things. We also have two peach trees and two apple trees. The peach trees this year were so fertile that several branches broke from the weight of all the peaches. There's really nothing like a sun-warmed peach just off the limb.
Some_Call_Me_Tim? wrote: Feed those chickens good quality feed and you'll get eggs like you wouldn't believe. After having a fresh egg from your own chickens, with rich, deeply colored yolk and firm whites, you'll never be able to go back to those wussy supermarket eggs with their watery, pale, tasteless yolks.
We grow some herbs as well, along with potatoes, lettuce, peppers, tomatoes, strawberries, asparagus, melons, and a handful of other things. We also have two peach trees and two apple trees. The peach trees this year were so fertile that several branches broke from the weight of all the peaches. There's really nothing like a sun-warmed peach just off the limb.
~Tim?
That's the plan my wife wants the chickens for her birthday, and we take good care of all our critters here (the cat who needs to lose weight might disagree with me though ). We're looking forward to our trees starting to grow fruit
KalashnikovMarine wrote: I wish I had space for such things. I have been considering an herb garden, but it's really the donkey end of the grow season so I doubt I'll have much to go on there.
That's why I wanted to use something along these lines. Each container has growth capacity equivalent to an acre of land farmed using conventional methods, uses almost a tenth as much water, less power, less fertiliser, and can produce a crop every 6-14 weeks depending on what you grow. Even better, there's far less labour involved than conventional farming methods; once you have everything set up and connected to water and power, all you have to do is ensure sufficient reserves of fertiliser for a full growth cycle and you can just leave it alone, the computer manages everything for you, not to mention that harvesting is easier when you don't have to dig anything up. It's barely more expensive than buying an equivalent capacity piece of land, at least around here.
Originally wanted to get chickens for the farm, but with the foxes and my dog being a poultry killer it's not really a safe option. We would need some serious chicken security.
We still grow various kinds of squash, okra, tomatoes, peppers (hot and bell), carrots, radishes, sugar snap peas, and eggplant.
That season is mostly over though, so we're moving on soon to various lettuces, brocolli, more carrots and radishes, more sugar snap peas, beets, possibly turnips, and whatever other cold weather crop strikes my fancy.
streamdragon wrote: Originally wanted to get chickens for the farm, but with the foxes and my dog being a poultry killer it's not really a safe option. We would need some serious chicken security.
We still grow various kinds of squash, okra, tomatoes, peppers (hot and bell), carrots, radishes, sugar snap peas, and eggplant.
That season is mostly over though, so we're moving on soon to various lettuces, brocolli, more carrots and radishes, more sugar snap peas, beets, possibly turnips, and whatever other cold weather crop strikes my fancy.
At the Houston house, the neighbor behind grows chickens. Occasionally they fly into the back yard - aka the Terror Dome.
Neighbor across also has chickens.
streamdragon wrote: Originally wanted to get chickens for the farm, but with the foxes and my dog being a poultry killer it's not really a safe option. We would need some serious chicken security.
We still grow various kinds of squash, okra, tomatoes, peppers (hot and bell), carrots, radishes, sugar snap peas, and eggplant.
That season is mostly over though, so we're moving on soon to various lettuces, brocolli, more carrots and radishes, more sugar snap peas, beets, possibly turnips, and whatever other cold weather crop strikes my fancy.
At the Houston house, the neighbor behind grows chickens. Occasionally they fly into the back yard - aka the Terror Dome.
Neighbor across also has chickens.
Oof. What's the death count so far? My dog is a cane corso mastiff / great dane cross who has serious food issues; she was a rescue found starving and weighing in about 25lbs (roughly 1/3rd her current weight). One of my neighbors chickens got loose and I didn't know it, so I didn't think much of letting my dog out without her invisible fence collar. *bawk* *Bawk* *BA-.....* That was an awkward call, let me tell you...
AT LEAST TWO chickens and a fighting rooster that we know about. Rusty is an 85 lb freight train freight train of a dog with massive jaws and a desire to eat animal intruders that cannot be underestimated.
Fun memory. TBone and Rodney visiting. TBone discovering the chickens on the other side and trying to chew through the fence to get them. He stayed there about two hours, then got lost about half way back (just sat down in the iddle of the yard barking for help), and Rusty going out and escorting him back.
Yodhrin wrote: It's so frustrating; with one old shipping container, some hydro equipment and the right seeds, I could be producing vegetables to feed several families for almost nothing in terms of cost -I mean literally so cheap I could afford to give them away- and with very little effort. But nooo, "it's an eyesore", "allotments are for people to grow things properly", "I'm a cretinous luddite that thinks computers are magical boxes run by faeries and your fancy techno-farm terrifies my tiny little mind"
I don't know man, I think those communal farming plots are about more than achieving the most efficient farming. There's a community aspect, and also some notion of having a nice little patch of garden in place. I think a big shipping crate lumped down in the middle of the communal garden isn't really the point.
streamdragon wrote: Originally wanted to get chickens for the farm, but with the foxes and my dog being a poultry killer it's not really a safe option. We would need some serious chicken security.
We still grow various kinds of squash, okra, tomatoes, peppers (hot and bell), carrots, radishes, sugar snap peas, and eggplant.
That season is mostly over though, so we're moving on soon to various lettuces, brocolli, more carrots and radishes, more sugar snap peas, beets, possibly turnips, and whatever other cold weather crop strikes my fancy.
My mother-in-law has a redbone coonhound that loves to maul small mammals, so when we get the chickens we'll be making sure that the coop is hound proof. Our dogs (Australian shepherd/snow dog mixes will try and herd the chickens, while the lab/greyhound will likely just ignore them )
With the local ordinances we can't have roosters, but if our yard was bigger we could have a bison
Yodhrin wrote: It's so frustrating; with one old shipping container, some hydro equipment and the right seeds, I could be producing vegetables to feed several families for almost nothing in terms of cost -I mean literally so cheap I could afford to give them away- and with very little effort. But nooo, "it's an eyesore", "allotments are for people to grow things properly", "I'm a cretinous luddite that thinks computers are magical boxes run by faeries and your fancy techno-farm terrifies my tiny little mind"
I don't know man, I think those communal farming plots are about more than achieving the most efficient farming. There's a community aspect, and also some notion of having a nice little patch of garden in place. I think a big shipping crate lumped down in the middle of the communal garden isn't really the point.
The point of allotments is ostensibly to allow people to grow veg; they're littered with old sheds, decrepit greenhouses, and 90% of them are not planted with any thought for aesthetic sensibilities. They literally refuse on the basis that using the space to grow using hydro doesn't have enough dirt involved, the idea being that I would somehow be "wasting" the plot by not grubbing about in the muck.
If you're referring to the communal back garden; yes, that's a lawn, but there's a fairly substantial portion at one side(the tenement block is roughly U-shaped, with one end lacking a structure as it backs on to a local rugby playing field) is covered in trees. One is a huge bloody willow with plenty of room underneath it for the container, the thing would barely even be visible from the garden. It's pure Ludditry; these same bunch of hags spent six months objecting to the council to try and stop them using dumpster-style bins rather than just having people leave rubbish bags out on the pavement, because they thought they were "too complicated"
Yodhrin wrote: The point of allotments is ostensibly to allow people to grow veg; they're littered with old sheds, decrepit greenhouses, and 90% of them are not planted with any thought for aesthetic sensibilities.
Ah, fair enough then. Consider me annoyed on your behalf, for whatever good that might do you
s. They might have figured out that "pretentious rich vegans" is a profitable market to exploit, but they're the same greedy sociopaths as every other large company.
