At the List Universe we love to dispel myths – so here we are, yet again, presenting another list of common myths that need to be debunked and forgotten once and for all. This time we look at medical myths – of which there are thousands. This is a selection of the ten most common, but do feel free to add your own to the comments.
The Myth: Sugar makes kids hyperactive
Dr. Vreeman and Dr. Carroll, both pediatricians at the Riley Hospital for Children recently said: “in at least 12 double-blinded, randomized, controlled trials, scientists have examined how children react to diets containing different levels of sugar. None of these studies, not even studies looking specifically at children with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder, could detect any differences in behavior between the children who had sugar and those who did not.” This includes artificial and natural sources of sugar. Interestingly, in the study, parents who were told their children had been given sugar when they hadn’t, noted that the child was more hyperactive. So it seems it is all in the parent’s mind.
The Myth: You lose most of your body heat through your head
A military study many years ago tested the loss of temperature in soldiers when exposed to very cold temperatures. They found rapid heat loss in the head – and so the idea that we lose heat through our heads was born. But what they didn’t tell you was that the soldiers were fully clothed except for their heads. This obviously skews the statistics considerably. The fact is, completely naked, you lose approximately 10% of your body heat through the head – the other 90% is lost via the other parts of your body.
The Myth: You should drink at least eight glasses of water a day
The origins of this myth is most likely the fact that a 1945 government agency said that the human body needed around 8 glasses of fluid a day. This included the fluid from all of the foods we eat and drinks like tea and coffee. Somehow over time “fluid” turned to “water” and the modern water myth arose. This also lead to silly slogans like “if you are thirsty it is too late” – a concept that would seem to have been invented by water bottlers who have something to gain from excess water consumption in the population in general. So, in reality, if you are thirsty, drink some water. If you are not, don’t.
The Myth: Chewing gum takes seven years to pass through your system
I am sure we have all been told at least once in our life by a concerned adult, not to swallow gum as it will take seven years to leave our bodies. This is right up there with the whole “fruit seed growing a tree in your stomach” silliness, but while most adults realize the tree story is a myth, they don’t realize that the gum one is too. It is true that gum is not digestible in the human body, but it simply passes whole through your system. It doesn’t stick to your insides, it just continues along with any food you have eaten and pops out the other end. This myth may have partly arisen from the fact that swallowing gum was once viewed as lower class and ignorant.
The Myth: Cracking your knuckles will cause arthritis in later life
The cracking sound in the knuckles is caused by the bones moving apart and forming a gas bubble – the sound is the bubble bursting. It is quite common to hear someone warning a knuckle-cracker that they will get arthritis, but the worst that can happen to a compulsive-cracker is that their finger joints may weaken over time. Arthritis is caused by a variety of things (such as crystal formations in the case of gout) – but knuckle cracking isn’t one of them.
The Myth: Teething causes a fever
Scientific studies have been done in the area of teething which show no correlation at all between fever and teething. If your baby is suffering from a new tooth and they also have a fever, it is advisable to check for other causes of the fever. The same is true of diarrhea which is also often blamed on teething in infants. It is always better to be safe than sorry when dealing with the health of children.
The Myth: Cancer treatment is painful and pointless – furthermore, it is incurable
While this may have been almost true thirty years ago, medical advances have meant that modern cancer treatments are far more effective and cause less suffering for the patient. A few decades ago, 90% of children with leukemia died; today 80% survive. Many people think cancer is incurable as there isn’t a “one drug fixes all” cure, but there are many people who are completely cured of cancer. Various drugs exist to treat different types of cancer, and many of them are extremely effective and well worth trying if you do get the disease.
The Myth: Back pain should be treated with bed rest
The opposite is actually true in this case. Bed rest can prevent the lower back from fully recovering – or at the very least, delay the recovery significantly. Patients who continue to engage in ordinary activities recover faster and usually have fewer problems with recurring pain and other back troubles. Interestingly, many studies have shown that this is not just true of back problems, but also many other medical problems. Thirty-nine independent studies found bed rest to be more harmful than good in a broad range of illnesses.
The Myth: Eating turkey makes you sleepy because it contains tryptophan
This is one of the most common myths on this list – and it pops up every year around Thanksgiving. But actually, chicken and ground beef contain almost identical quantities of tryptophan as turkey does. Other foods such as cheese and pork contain significantly more of the chemical than turkey. So why do people think turkey makes them sleepy? It is most likely due to turkey appearing at very large meals often eaten during the day rather than the evening. The heavy meal slows blood flow which can cause drowsiness, and the timing can have a huge psychological impact: in other words, you are imagining it.
The Myth: Eating at night makes you fat
Secret snackers rejoice! This is a complete myth. It doesn’t matter what time of day you eat, as long as you eat only the total calories that you burn each day, you will not gain weight. If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight, and if you eat more calories, you will gain. It is as simple as that. Having said that, the routine of three meals a day at the same time each day can have other benefits in life (routine is good and it helps humans work more effectively), but snacks at night are no worse than snacks in the morning or afternoon.
The Myth: It is harder to lose weight than to gain weight
Actually – once you get your head around a new eating pattern, math and science are working in your favor. It is mathematically easier to lose than to gain. For example, if you eat 3,500 calories more than you burn, you will gain 0.3 pounds (0.14 kg), but if you burn 3,500 calories more than you eat, you will lose 1 pound (0.45 kg). Also, if you want to lose weight, you can expose yourself to significant changes in temperature which speeds up your metabolism. Finally, the above information is based on a pure fat diet – variations to the math occur when you introduce other types of food.
Contributor: JFrater























February 16th, 2009 at 1:38 am
After all my volunteering experiences, I strongly disagree with the first >
February 16th, 2009 at 1:38 am
“if you’re thirsty it’s already too late” comes from the fact that the first sign of dehydration is being thirsty.
cool list btw
February 16th, 2009 at 1:41 am
*After all my volunteering experiences, I strongly disagree with number 10 >
February 16th, 2009 at 1:55 am
I actually have huge difficulties gaining weight although my diet consists of what people would call “bad food”.. pizza and the likes… There’s certainly a question of metabolism…
This list has a lot of food related myths, which is medical in a way but I was expecting more purely medical stuff.
Interesting list though, thanks.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:55 am
I have to say that I honestly disagree with #’s 10, 3, 1 and the bonus. But what do I know, I’ll have to do some researching. I still love this site though. Thanx JFrater.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:57 am
“Eating at night makes you fat” could that be true if it was related to the time you went to sleep? If you usually go to sleep at 10pm and you ate a sugary snack at 9:30pm then wouldn’t more of it turn into fat rather than if you ate if at midday and were active afterwards.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:58 am
Cool list. Relieved about the knuckles!!!
February 16th, 2009 at 2:07 am
Ok, interesting list (and i rejoice at #1) but I’m rather skeptical about 10. Where did you get your information for that one because life experience says otherwise for me. Of course it’s certainly possible it’s psychological (just look at placebos and such) perhaps, having been told your entire life that sugar will cause hyperactivity in children, the parent sees hyperactivity when there is none and the child acts more hyper just because that’s what the brain has been told it should do? I dunno but very interesting list. Kinda missing the literature though…
February 16th, 2009 at 2:09 am
I’ve heard the one about hyperactivity and sugar and love telling people it’s all it their heads, but people are usually hard-headed. I’m surprised people argue with these items, it’s hard to argue with empirical evidence.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:12 am
I don’t agree with 10. I’m a routine mother and my children went to bed and usually fell asleep well before 8 at night. But if for one or the other reason they had too much sugar during the day, I would struggle way after 10 to get them to sleep. And I don’t think I imagined 2 to 4 hours difference in their bedtime. But that was just my experience.
As for the rest, especially number 1, I’m delighted. I hate drinking water and I always swallow chewing gum. And man, those snacks while watching late night movies always made me feel guilty, but not anymore.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:12 am
nice one. Thank God that the 8 glasses of water a day is a myth. I better convince my mom about this myth. She gets mad when I don’t finish two big, fracking water bottles I’m forced to bring to school everyday. Well, finishing those bottles is like drowning for me, and after 5 minutes I feel like throwing up.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:15 am
i have to disagree with #10 too.
sorry, but after watching my 5 year old cousin a few times, i know to hide the pixie sticks.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:18 am
“It is harder to lose weight than to gain weight” is not a myth for majority of people are lazy enough to do “burn” calories and un-disciplined that they eat bad food. The mathematical way has a point but it ain’t reality. You still have to break the boundaries of being disciplined
February 16th, 2009 at 2:31 am
Einar.
#10 is correct. My eldest boy went through testing for his hyperactivity 18 years ago. One of the first things they ruled out was sugar. After several months of eliminating different foods/food additives, it was found to be an additive (very often added to foods that contain sugar), that was the cause.
We have seen with other children that went through the same testing that none reacted to sugar itself. The testing was done at the Mater Childrens Hospital. The children were reacting to a variety of different foods, but none to sugar.
Most parents notice a change because in their kids after they remove chocolate and other items that contain sugar. What they don’t realize is that most foods contain some sugar, so if you have a reaction to sugar you would have a very restricted diet.
To give you an idea, go to your pantry and have a look at the ingredients in your processed food and you will find that most of the food will contain sugar. Even things that you wouldn’t think would have sugar contain enough to cause a reaction.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:31 am
Sweet list, as an avid knuckle cracker and pretty much every other joint that i can pop, its good to see number 6 on here. I’ve known what the “pop” is for a long time and i believe that when people tell me that it causes arthritis, they are just saying that cuz it pisses them off.
*kra-krack-krack-pop!*
“Yer gonna get arthritis!”
….pause….
*Begins popping every joint possible.”
Ha! Assholes.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:32 am
“The Myth: Cracking your knuckles will cause arthritis in later life”
Ha! I never believed that! Awesome.
”
The Myth: Eating at night makes you fat”
If anyone actually believed that… then wow.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:39 am
Disagreeing with #10 & #5, but looking for further info gives me something to look further into while my fiancee’s out of town tonight. Dishes? What mountain of dishes?
February 16th, 2009 at 2:42 am
it’s hard to lose weight..argh…
February 16th, 2009 at 2:43 am
Oh forgot to add – of course it’s easier to gain weight than lose it! All I have to do to gain weight is sit around eating chocolate!
(someone had to say it)
February 16th, 2009 at 2:45 am
It is funny how people disagree with number 10 (children do not get hyperactive from eating sugar) when there have been actual studies done that clearly shows it is an imagined effect.
I especially find Rina amusing at comment number 10 – Rina, is it possible that you have sometimes struggled with getting your children to bed and thought to yourself “They must have been getting to much sugar today.” Is it possible that on the days they have had some sugar you have sighed and braced yourself for the combat, which your children would have immediately picked up on and started acting up? Is it possible that there was days when they went to bed late and you couldn’t remember them having much sugar at all? Is it possible you told them “Don’t have to much sugar or you will get hyper,” thus causing them to act out your expectations?
In short, is it possible it was all in your head? No? Surely not… Parents experience always trumps science, right? So you parents out there still do it the same way it has always been done? Wrap the babies up in tight little bundles so they can’t move, give your kids frequent spankings to keep them in line, that sort of thing? There are a lot of areas in which parents experience is just imagination, a selfperpetuating myth if you so wish. Science has spoken, now deal with the fact that your kids are hyper because of you – not because of sugar.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:15 am
sigh….i have to be the downer and dispute #5. Teething CAN cause diarrhea. Everytime my daughter cut a tooth, it was diarrhea city. (and yes, i took her to the doc the first 5 times) Nothing was wrong with her. All that pain and stress of teething gave her the runs. When you get really really stressed, don’t you ever get a bad case of the runs?
Or maybe my child was just weird. (which is very likely)
February 16th, 2009 at 3:23 am
Yay for #1!
February 16th, 2009 at 3:46 am
* Fever from teething?
If infants didn’t put everything in their mouth, then germs wouldn’t get inside their body.
* Hyperactive Kids?
Although I hate kids and avoid those snot nosed little shits, i though it would have been from food colourings and additives… typically food with such rubbish in them are high sugar ie: junkfoods. Sugar does give a burst of energy and too much can , speaking from you experiences.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:56 am
If I ever have a sore back, I tend to lie down on the sofa which is pretty similar to bed rest. It nearly always makes me feel better so maybe there is some truth to the bed rest one.
Or maybe it’s just me thinking it’s going to make me feel better and therefore I do feel better. Probs quite as likely.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:58 am
wow all this time I believed the arthritis one and the eating at night one :O Im relieved!
February 16th, 2009 at 5:07 am
#5 = Cutest. Baby. EVER!
February 16th, 2009 at 5:43 am
#22 Frank, Amen to that. I’ll also step out on a very thin limb and say that ADHD is a pseudo-scientific construct designed to appease parents that refuse to do the hard work and control their normal, active (usually boys) children. I am a teacher and I can make ADHD kids sit still indefinitely, even without their stupid drugs.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:55 am
Thank goodness suger doesn’t make me hyper – now i can eat all the sweets i want!
February 16th, 2009 at 5:55 am
Numbers six and eight are related though. Gout is caused by Uric acid building up in the joints, as well as other places in the body, and is very irritating and sometimes painful. One of the chief causes for this? Dehydration. It can also be caused by high blood pressure, because if your blood pressure is too high, then your blood moves through the kidneys too fast to remove excess salts, acids, and other things. One of the causes for high blood pressure can also be dehydration.
I’m not saying that you need eight glasses a day, but your body needs a certain amount of water handy to flush out toxins and such, and if it doesn’t have it, it takes it from the blood, which causes you to become more dehydrated. So, if you’re thirsty, drink a glass of water, not a soda. The High Fructose Corn Syrup in soda, not to mention the other sugars, are among the things your body will need water for. So, the more clear water you drink, the better.
Also, if you do develop gout, a good, easy, and cheap cure (not intended as modern medical treatment, or diagnostic tool) is a couple glasses of water, and a tablespoon of raw apple cider vinegar, twice a day until the symptoms go away. Took two days for it to work for me.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:05 am
Not sure about a couple of these, kids do seem to get hyper when consuming fixxy drinks, may not be sugar but possibly something else.
The heat through the head one is I feel wrong, I was both in the Army and at Sea in cold places. I can assure anyone out there that if you exsercise heavily while wearing head gear you will boil, in very quick order. Body core temerature must be maintained and a lot of heat is lost from the extremities, head, hands and feet. I have a bald friend who always wears a hat or he will freeze, and as we originaly come from 58 degress North we know what the cold is about.
Also the converse is true, in a desert location you must cover the head or you will boil as well.
Overall not a bad list.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:07 am
1) Scientific studies can prove anything, and there are always contrary studies. It comes down to who you believe.
2) None of these will apply to everyone. There will always be an exception
3) All those people who are cracking their knuckles with relief? Weak joints – not a good thing.
4) Heat through the head? The original statement stands depending how you read it. You lose most of your body heat through your head [when you are clothed] I imagine stands true.
5) Fat and food is mostly about metabolism, but my understanding was that metabolism in general slows down when sleeping therefore food is more likely to be stored/converted inefficiently.
Not bad list, but a bit too anti-sensationalist for my liking.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:51 am
“if you eat 3,500 calories more than you burn, you will gain 0.3 pounds (0.14 kg), but if you burn 3,500 calories more than you eat, you will lose 1 pound (0.45 kg).”
I agree with 14 – It is hard to burn so much more than you eat in many cases.
In most cases the people who need to lose weight don’t have the enduracne for exercise to burn more than they eat – even with a diet.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:52 am
When it comes to losing weight it’s rather simple. Eat less, move around more. Of course there are always exceptions. For the people that suffer from true medical issues that prevent them from losing/gaining/ or maintaining weight that “normal” people do, this is an everyday uphill struggle. Metabolism of course comes into play.
Losing weight is hard for me…because I’m lazy and I just want it to fall off with a snap of my fingers.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:02 am
I already knew about most items on this list but strongly disagree with two of them.
The best study I have ever seen on the connection between sugar and hyperactivity is my own study raising 2 children.
They eat sugary foods or candy and bounce off the walls for the next hour. No sugar and they are calm. That’s simple enough to understand isn’t it?
And as far as your #1 and the bonus. Of course it’s harder to lose weight than to gain. You make it sound as simple as changing the decades old patterns and lifestyle you’ve been living. Don’t you think that would be tremendously hard to do?
.29 BigwigRabbit
You’re not a teacher you’re an ass. Please find another career quickly! (And take that idiot Frank with you).
February 16th, 2009 at 7:03 am
number 2 is good. i love thanksgiving. go to a relatives house, watch football, eat a huge meal, watch more football, fall asleep, wake up, eat pie. its the perfect holiday.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:07 am
i’ve heard #1 from medical professionals. if children get hyper from eating chocolate, it’s because there is caffeine in chocolate, not because of the sugar. that’s why doctors recommend for pregnant women not to eat chocolate as well as obstain from caffeine intake for the baby’s sake.
if sugar makes people hyper, then why isn’t candy a staple for a person trying to lose weight? just something to think about.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:27 am
29. BigwigRabbit
Actually, ADHD is real, it’s just no where near as common as educators and therapy types make it out to be. The real cases you see huge differences in the children with and without the medications. Furthermore, the children actually want to be on the medication in cases where it is a real diagnosis and not some one wanting to ignore a kid’s difficulties. It’s a lot like watching some one who needs anti-psycotics go off the rails to watch a real ADHD case go without the meds.
That said, most of the minor ADD cases are really just little boys who need recess and smaller class sizes. They can also be little girls who are having trouble keeping up or staying interested in the material covered in class. Recent educational studies have been overwhelmingly showing that recess helps kids focus better in the classroom.
I hit the trip wires for ADD when I was a kid because of other learning difficulties mostly related to fine motor skills and reading skills. For me and most of the ‘ADD’ kids I’ve met in my life, smaller classrooms and behavior modification therapies work well. Having a dedicated teacher who works to keep the interest of everyone in the class is a blessing so good on you for working on that.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:43 am
bigwig: i’m right there with you. discipline solves all sorts of problems. paying attention is one of them.
as a test, take your average ADHD student and put him down with an x-box. (assuming he likes gaming) observe for a while. does he have alot of trouble paying attention to the game he is playing? no. why? because he wants to pay attention to it.
i work with junior high and high school students and it is just a matter of preference and discipline for my ADD kiddos. students know where there is “a hole” in authority. if claiming a disease and telling people you have to take some pills will give you more freedom to do whatever you want, the average student is going to jump on this gravy train.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:48 am
The thing about late night snacking is that it is usually pointless. You’re about to go to bed so you could just as easily skip the snack. The reason why you shouldn’t late night snack isn’t bad because of the way the food is processed but because those calories are typically extra calories.
It is true that sugars and simple carbs if not burnt quickly will turn to fat more readily but if your net calories for every day is 0, that fat will get burnt anyway.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:53 am
just a quick thing about number one-
eating at night in and of itself doesn’t make you fat, that’s true. However, night eaters do tend to gain more wieght because a)they’re eating more, and b) lets say you down some oatmeal for breakfast. Then you walk to your car, walk into your office, maybe stand up and chat with people, walk up or down some stairs…you get my drift. Now, let’s say you eat that same oatmeal at night and then you….lie down and sleep. You aren’t burning anything except the minimal amount of calories you burn while you sleep. So yes, night eating can cause weight gain, but from outside factors, not just the fact that it’s nightime.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:55 am
ADD is just a way of getting attention…I should know, I have it and so does my daughter. We both laugh it off and know it’s not sugar! I knew that one about #10.
I am glad that drinking 8 glasses is an option not a fact…i hate water. I need something in it…gin, voodka…you know, the usuals.
and thank God for #1 and the bonus! I can eat at night and loose weight (as long as I figure out a way to burn those calories before sleep!) hee, hee
February 16th, 2009 at 7:56 am
*lose
February 16th, 2009 at 8:01 am
TonyDee, by that logic an infant should be running a fever constantly.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:11 am
I think ADD is both real and fake. To me, probably more than half are just kids who’s parent’s don’t want to sit with them and read a book or interact wiht them. They have “work” and would rather do that then actually watch and take care of their child. And then there are the kids who actually have the disorder. Who really can’t pay attention, and can’t focus on the simple tasks. But, there are the ones who aren’t and get treated like they are. The ones with all the meds and whatnot. It just sickens me to see these boisterous children who’s parent’s can care a less about rasing their children and would rather just stuff pills down their throat!!!
February 16th, 2009 at 8:21 am
i’m gonna have alot of fun with number 10
i’m gonna tell every parent i know about this one lol
February 16th, 2009 at 8:36 am
I’m sorry but I beg to differ on N.8. Drinking water is essential for anyone’s health, as staying hydrated is necessary for most metabolic functions (beta-oxidation of fats included… Think about it next time you go on a diet). The whole “when you’re thirsty it’s too late” is *not* a slogan invented by bottled water brands, thirst is really one of the first symptoms of dehydration. I’m glad that some commenters pointed out the importance of drinking water for maintaining proper renal function; I’d also like to add that coffee and tea are not necessarily good means of fluid intake, as they often contain far too much sugar, which is harmful on the arteries and is of course fattening, and may also contain too much caffeine, which promotes lipolysis and raises the cholesterol levels. Water keeps you hydrated and it’s harmless (it’s only toxic when poisoned or taken in massive amounts). Plus, nobody said you have to drink bottled water. More often than not, tap water is just good enough.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:42 am
I definately don’t think ADHD is a way of getting attention. I’ve met fellow college students that actually do struggle with it, and it’s quite apparent. My ex, who was SO excited to see Grindhouse when it came out, couldn’t pay attention to it for more then five minutes. He would start talking, play with his cell phone, fidget, get up and walk around the lobby, etc. etc. When we left the theater, he just mumbled “sorry”, but didn’t make a big production out of it. Even during our high school graduation, he couldn’t help but fidget the whole time. ADHD isn’t just an academic disease, and for actual sufferers, it’s not a method for getting attention.
I also think a lot of students are mislabeled as attention deficit, especially in school districts that are not equipped to handle other learning disabilities. I have dyscalculia , but that remained undiagnosed until my senior year (my dyslexia wasn’t recognized until the end of my freshman year of college). Until then, I was labeled as “ADHD/ADD”. I was labeled as an “ADD” student until the NIMH stopped recognizing it- and despite having less energy then my classmates- I was incorrectly diagnosed as ADHD.
I know plenty of people with a wide range of physical + mental aliments that are misdiagnosed. Depression, bipolar disorder, prolonged illness, bladder infections, aspergers syndrome are easily misdiagnosed (dismissed?)P at the elementary level as “ADHD”.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:55 am
With number 8, it all depends on where you are. The more humid it is, the more likely you will lose the water in your body and it is best to drink more water.
With number 1, it all depends on when and what you snack and when you sleep after you snack. If you snack to close to your bedtime and if you eat too much, your body will not have time to digest what foods you ate.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:01 am
There is definite evidence for the existence of ADHD, and it is most certainly a condition that many people suffer from. I think there is some confusion about it as often people are misdiagnosed or diagnosed too quickly. However, anyone claiming it doesn’t exist is ignorant, plain and simple.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Question:
“Eating at night makes you fat” could that be true if it was related to the time you went to sleep? If you usually go to sleep at 10pm and you ate a sugary snack at 9:30pm then wouldn’t more of it turn into fat rather than if you ate if at midday and were active afterwards.”
Answer:
No.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:24 am
“With number 1, it all depends on when and what you snack and when you sleep after you snack. If you snack to close to your bedtime and if you eat too much, your body will not have time to digest what foods you ate.”
…Wrong. The only thing that matters is what you eat compared to how active you are throughout the day. The time that you eat is irrelevant.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:35 am
“nice one. Thank God that the 8 glasses of water a day is a myth. I better convince my mom about this myth. She gets mad when I don’t finish two big, fracking water bottles I’m forced to bring to school everyday. Well, finishing those bottles is like drowning for me, and after 5 minutes I feel like throwing up.”
…Then Stop drinking so much soda. And no, the information on the water is not correct. Fact: If your urine is not almost colorless then you are NOT drinking enough water. But don’t worry about that, kidneys are overrated.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:42 am
I get hyper when I eat a lot of sugar, and I’m a teenager. I don’t bounce off the walls like a little kid would, but I really have to disagree with #10.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:45 am
“For example, if you eat 3,500 calories more than you burn, you will gain 0.3 pounds (0.14 kg), but if you burn 3,500 calories more than you eat, you will lose 1 pound (0.45 kg).”
This is completely and utterly wrong. Where exactly did you get that info? If you eat 3,500 cals more than you burn, you’ll gain a pound, not .03 .
February 16th, 2009 at 9:47 am
Well, not a bad list… But not a good one, either. For instance, #9 Body Heat. Next time I’m standing in the snow completely naked, I’ll remember to reach for some clothes, and not the hat that I would ordinarily reach for to stay warm. The army study was far more practical.
#1 Midnight Snacking. While your point might be valid regarding the timing of your intake, your assertion that simply consuming less calories than you burn = losing weight is false. That simplistic approach to weight loss, in my opinion, perpetuates weight loss myths. An example- say you burn 2000 calories a day typically. If you starve yourself for a month on 500 calories per day, you will lose weight. At your new weight, you now burn 1500 calories per day. If you increase your caloric intake to 1500 calories per day…. contrary to your model, you will not maintain your current weight- you will gain weight. The body’s mechanism for storing and releasing fat is far more complex than most people choose to believe. While I don’t agree with everything in this book, I recommend this:
http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-Gary-Taubes/dp/1400040787
I guess I’m one of the people who has bought into the teething fever myth. My current baby always seems to get a fever right around the time his teeth break though. I can see the point that someone else brought up, though- he tend to put more things in his mouth at those time too… Could cause more exposure to bad stuff.
Thanks for the entertainment JFrater!
February 16th, 2009 at 9:48 am
“Fat and food is mostly about metabolism, but my understanding was that metabolism in general slows down when sleeping therefore food is more likely to be stored/converted inefficiently.”
No, no, no. It’s all about math. Imagine a person burns 1,500 calories during the day and 500 while they sleep at night. Obviously, they burn less calories at night, but that still doesn’t matter. If they eat only 200 calorie snack during the day, they still burn off 1800 more calories.
Imagine the person instead eats a 200 calorie snack right before going to bed. That means they burned 1500 calories during the day, then ate 200 calories, then burned 500 calories while asleep. They still burned off 1800 more calories than they consumed.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:51 am
MW is totally right. Eating a snickers bar at 9 pm or 2 pm makes ZERO difference on weight gain/loss. The idea is that eating after dinner is probably extra calories you dont need… but it would be no better to consume those extra calories before dinner.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:55 am
I’m glad to see some of these myths dispelled. I was always leery of #10, even when my children were all quite small and the prevailing wisdom was not to allow children any sugar at all. While I kept it aside as a treat, I never denied it, but I did want them to have a balanced diet first and foremost.
Funnily enough, I did find something that turned them into raving maniacs for a few hours – chocolate covered espresso beans. Of course, they weren’t supposes to get into them, but they did, and for a couple of hours they were bouncing off the walls! Of course, they were 9 months, 18 months, and 26 months, so I could just bounce them back, out of my way, but it way funny.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Once I ate an apple and accidentally swallowed a seed. A few months later I had to have surgery to remove a small tree!
True story…..
February 16th, 2009 at 9:57 am
“Of course, they were 9 months, 18 months, and 26 months, so I could just bounce them back, out of my way, but it way funny.”
How exactly is it possible to have children at those ages? Adoption?
February 16th, 2009 at 9:58 am
Ed, he never said he was drinking soda, just that he didn’t want to drink large amounts of water..and colorless urine is a sign of enough/too much water. Dark colored is a sign of dehydration or not enough.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Nice, interesting list!
For the last one, you ought to specify… 3 meals a day WITH one or two snacks thrown in is actually better for you than just 3 meals a day, as long as you’re still consuming your total calories that you burn. The snacks make the you less hungry for your 3 meals, so each meal becomes smaller, and you have a more constant flow of sugar to your bloodstream.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:05 am
The reason people say snacking at night makes you gain weight is because snacking at night usually does lead to cosuming far more calories than you should. Women’s Health magazine reported that people can consume up to 500 more calories a day if they snack at night.
So technically that ‘myth’ is rooted in the fact you debunked it with.
Still, great list!
February 16th, 2009 at 10:11 am
I can personally disagree with number three on back pain. I suffer intermittent lower back pain due a pinched nerve (sciatic). I used to “work” through it. I would go through bouts about 2 – 3 times a year. I would be in intense pain for about 2 – 3 weeks. The pain starts in my lower back about at the belt line and shoots down the back of my legs. I could barely walk or function, but I would continue “try” to work as normal. I would take Advil and prop my feet up in the evenings.
My doctor (a D.O.)convinced me to try one day of bed rest if I started to feel the symptoms. That was two years ago. If I lay in bed and relax, with my feet propped the pain is gone by evening and the following day I’m fine. I have never had my pain last more than one day. Bed rest works every time and the frequency has now decreased to about once a year.
My 2 cents worth…
February 16th, 2009 at 10:12 am
*consuming far more
Stupid typos. XD
February 16th, 2009 at 10:15 am
How about the one where hair grows on the palm of your hand
February 16th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Here’s my take on what I know of these facts:
#10: Wouldn’t sugar increase overall activity/jitteriness? Blood sugar increases our energy, so I don’t see why this would be false.
#8: Correct. You can’t assume that 64 ounces of water is a constant amount. People who are higher in activity levels or living in hotter climates need more water than sedate, cold climate people. Weight is also a factor.
#6: Correct, however you can crack your knuckles in a “healthy” way. Putting pressure on the knuckle is bad, but popping the joint by lightly stretching your finger is better for you.
#3 Yes. Get moving, people, but be careful. This doesn’t mean that back pain = go run a marathon. Sedation of the muscles is never good- it can lead to atrophy. Do slow stretches to help your back out and apply heat to increase blood flow to the area.
#1 I also question this one. You burn different amounts of calories based upon your activity. A Snickers bar before bed is energy that’s wasted- you won’t be able to increase your activity to correspond to the extra calories whereas you might if it was consumed earlier.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:32 am
The whole idea about eating at night is that, if you do, you’re body doesn’t get to endure starving while sleeping, thus when you wake up you eat a healthy breakfast. Eating at night certainly won’t make you fat, but it doesn’t help if you want to lose weight.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:32 am
#10 is hard for many people to accept because kids do seem hyperactive after eating many sugary things… the problem though is that it is not the sugar but the additives (artificial food dyes and flavourings) that are often in sugary and many savoury treats… these have been proven to cause hyperactivity…
February 16th, 2009 at 10:33 am
58. Phil: They’re called “Irish twins”- you can have a kid, get pregnant immediately, then have another nine months later (or premature).
February 16th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Actually, number 4 is flat wrong. There is no cure for cancer via treatment. There are preventative measures, there is remission, but no cure. A particular form of cancer may come back after treatment. Cancer is not something that gets cured from your blood stream. It stays there, in your DNA as a genetic anomaly. The fact that some people get treated and then never get cancer again isn’t an indication that the cancer is cured, just that it’s firmly in remission. To say otherwise is the same as saying someone is cured of the common cold if they get it once and magically never get it again.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:05 am
The bonus is bunk. It doesn’t take into account the fact that your body always uses carbohydrates for energy before it uses lipids (fats.) Also, excess fats get stored in fat cells. Once they are in the cells, it’s incredibly hard for your body to harness them.
Also, when you diet, your metabolism slows down. When you resume your old eating habits, your metabolism takes a while to speed back up again, so you are bombarding your body with carbs and fats that it doesn’t need, so you gain weight really fast, faster than if you didn’t diet at all.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:06 am
I agree with every single thing on this list. Both common sense and experience confirm every point.
Teething will cause the child’s cheeks to get hot; that is not a fever – fever is internal body temperature. Nor does it cause diarrhea; it can cause loose stools – the constant drooling fires up the digestive system and will accelerate it. That is NOT the same as diarrhea – it will not cause dehydration etc. There is no pathogen.
Sugar doesn’t cause hyperactivity; even in my kid with many psychological problems. They may get a little bouncy at halloween, but that is because of the festivities – not the candy. I always let my kids eat it until it was gone. 24 hours of sugar bath for the teeth is much better than spreading it out over a month.
And for you folks commenting on how the ADHD kid’s behaviour is the parents fault – bullshit. I have 4 kids, 3 of whom discipline worked, one it does not. And it doesn’t matter what we do at home. His behaviour is good away from home – he has good social skills, and he had the lessons. He just lacks the necessary resources (time to process) to deal with life’s disappointments. He is unmedicated btw, he refuses. Too bad, his life with be more pleasurable if he had the extra few minutes to process. Of course back in the day it wouldn’t have been an issue. He would have gone to work at 16 as a lumberjack or such. That is not an option today.
I’ve always known about the water myth. If I was to consume 8 glasses of any beverage a day, I’d be walking around sloshing. Thirst is the body’s way to tell us to take a drink. Not a warning of impending doom. Geez.
The only point I have any disagreement with is the statement that losing weight is easier than gaining it. I don’t believe Jamie has given enough weight to the yo-yo effect. The diet cycle can cause the body to go into famine mode – the metabolism slows in response to the sudden cut-off in food, packing away more fat for times of scarcity. Diet too often and it becomes a vicious circle. Much better to increase your activity first; then start the cutting back.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:06 am
Should have addressed the dangerous myth that vaccinations and flu shots are bad for people.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:08 am
# 62 Mike – I agree with you 100% I had the same problem about 10 years ago, I was in traction for 10 days.
In my case the protective layer between the lower vertebra was non existent – hence the pinched nerve.
I still get twinges once or twice a year.
What helps me big time is – lay flat on your back pull your knees up to your chest , prop 3 big pillows up behind your butt – then put the lower part of your legs over the pillows.
You are stretching the lower part of your spine – 3 Hrs. max. you will feel a difference.
I dont know who is on duty tonight at LS – but apologizes to either Mom 424 – Cyn – JF sorry for going off the beaten track a bit
Good List otherwise.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:12 am
The only one I would totally disagree with is #5-There is no doubt that teething can cause a fever in a baby. But Mosha was exactly right. People are different and there’s always exceptions and of couse scientific studies can prove anything they want it to prove. Global warming for example. From what I read and hear about 50% of meteorologists say it’s a fact and the other 50% say it’s bullshit. So there it is. It comes down to who you want to believe.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Sorry Mike is at # 64 – I mentioned in my comment ” tonight ” it is 8-15 pm. here as I type this.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:14 am
Great list! I knew most of them, but some I didn’t know. I’m glad about the knuckle cracking one, because I do that non-stop!
February 16th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
actually turkey does make you sleepy, and it IS because it has tryptophan. the reason for this is that tryptophan gets turned into serotonin in your body after you eat it. serotonin then in turn gets turned into melatonin, melatonin is the brain chemical that makes you sleepy. the reason people get more sleepy at thanksgiving is because they also consume large amounts of carbohydrates, and carbohydrates force your body to make more serotonin from the tryptophan, therefor leading to more of a sleepy feeling.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Einar, I think you are confused with caffeine.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Man, gaining weight is so hard for me. I can work out, eat any bullshit I want and I won’t gain a pound-and i’m always eating. I guess my rocket high metabolism has something to do with it
Some might call me lucky
February 16th, 2009 at 12:20 pm
38. DiscHuker,
I believe most of the problems with children today relay on positive parenting and the discipline they receive at home, I also think that diagnosing ADD + medication has become sort of an easy solution.
ADD is just a tag for a series of symptoms and neither ECG, CAT scan or glucose assimilation can give a conclusive reason for the disorder, but the fact is that the symptoms DO exist.
So, the fact that you can provide a structured ambient for students helps a lot in terms of prediction and organization for every children not just the ones with ADD, in fact, every strategy for teacher guidance regarding ADD has that thought behind it.
But Attention is a complicated subject where a lot of components come into play (from detecting a stimulus, avoiding distractors, processing the information, etc).
Your example for the X-box game is not a good one (a lot of parents come to me with this one), you can´t compare a video game where there are thousands of visual and auditive stimuli per second, where the environment changes constantly and receiving rewarding feedback relies on the absolute immersion on the task; with a classroom no matter how good the teacher may be (although there´s a big range here).
Bottom line is that you have to work with what you have and evaluate each case individually to weight the cost-benefit of medicating a child.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
@ JROC: Most people dont gain weight when they work out regularly…
February 16th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
hi, thought provoking list JF. Very interestig word play on here, so let me just clarify your points…
10 – Hyperactivity is largely caused by additives (‘E’ numbers, sugar substitutes, artificial colours and flavourings)
9 – In cold weather, most body heat is lost through any exposed patch of skin (head to toe)
8 – Eight cups of fluid is ideal (this includes milk on cerial, soups, ice-cream, fruit juices, and eating veg rich in water such as cucumber, lettuce)
6 – Any kind of repetative joint injury or joint weakness could lead to arthritis, particularly as the tissues break down with age.
5 – When blood stops flowing to any part of the body, it congeils and becomes toxic to the system. If this blood leaks back, there is blood-poisoning, which can cause the variety of sickly symptons.
3 – Back pain is unlikely to work itself off through hard work, just as it is unlikely to heal correctly in a soft bed. The options are: take it easy and hopefully the joints will realign, see an ostiopath, or perform very light yoga under supervision.
2 – Turkey is a fibrous material, and as such likes to soak up the digestive juices (more than fatty meats). As the body makes more stomach acid to cope with the digestion, it uses a lot of amino acids and a whole lot of energy; which the individual feels as a loss of vitality and sometimes drowsiness. So effect is not due to tryptophan, which is – amoung other things – an antidepressant.
1 – Late night meals will take longer to digest if the person goes to sleep – as everything slows down – but it is the size and type of food which attributes to fat. For example, eating non fatty foods will not make you fat! Eating bananas before bed, for example, has been shown to aid sleep.
Bonus – Weight gains are more in common with body types and constitution. Some naturally thin people (Ectomorphs) find it very difficult to put on weight or muscle. Endomorphs are the opposite. For the common individual (Mesomorphs), it should be just as easy to gain as well as to loose weight.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I think the reason #1 seems to be an issue is not due the time when people are eating but usually, it is the type of foods you are eating at that time. Most people I know who want to eat later in the day usually satisfy the craving with things like chocolates or other sweets instead of making healthier snack choices like veggies or fruits.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
i have to say that i dont entirely believe #1. When i went to boarding school, we would end up eating huge meals including hoagies, vast amounts of oreos and other amazing but fatty foods at around midnight, and i gained a few pounds, then when i left boarding school and stopped eating food that late, not only did i lose the pounds i had gained but i lost a few more other than that. I didnt change my lifestyle at all, and i excersised the same amount i did at school. Its possible that the weight loss could be explained by a change in my diet but i still think it is because i was eating late at night. It makes sense because while we sleep we arent burning as many calories and so any food we eat within a few hours of going to bed would not be burned and become fat. obviously im not a scientist, but based on my experiences i disagree with #1
February 16th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
# 71 SMD,
Not true. Not all cancers are caused by mutated genes that exist in every cell. Example- one particular cell (a liver cell for instance) undergoes a mutation that causes it to reproduce out of control. The result is a tumor. If that cell and all the cells that descend from it are destroyed, then the cancer is gone. No more uncontrolled reproduction will occur, unless another cell undergoes a similar mutation. If that happens, it is due to chance, not genetics.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:38 pm
I am an incurable knuckle-cracker, and I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard from my mom, aunt, and grandmother about how I’m going to have SUCH bad arthritis someday (the latter two work for a hospital, though they’re not doctors). I always try to tell them it’s not true, but, eh, what’re ya gonna do?
February 16th, 2009 at 12:44 pm
It’s not that eating at night makes you gain weight, it’s that if you eat within an hour or two of going to sleep (and falling asleep, which is more possible after a meal, the same reason people get tired after gorging themselves at Thanksgiving dinner) then your body has nothing to do with the contents of your stomach but to turn it to glucose which then becomes part of the fat stores on your body if you don’t use it, which you won’t, because you’re sleeping.
That last one is tricky; it’s not as simple as simple math. What you said above would equate to if someone fasted (not ate) for a day, they would lose weight. So if someone wanted to lose 10 pounds, they could alternate between eating days and not eating days. it doesn’t work like that, and actually if you do starve yourself for more than about 12 hours, then until you get back to a normal schedule, your body thinks it’s starving and does everything it can to turn that food into fat.
Anyway, I’m done explaining. this was a poorly made list.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
ok, regards to #1 – it doesn’t matter when you eat. Your body does not gain and lose weight at the time you eat. It is a process that takes time. At night your body is repairing itself, building muscles, etc. It will digest food just as if you are sitting on the couch during the day. If you exercise you will burn more calories but again, you can’t just eat a double cheeseburger and go running. If you consistantly burn more calories that you consume, your body will begin to lose weight, if you consistently consume more than you burn your body will gain weight. If you are very active, it is important to have fuel at night for your body to use as it recovers from physical exercise.
As said before if you consume your daily calorie intake during the day, and then eat a lot of food before bed, you could be eating too much food and you will gain weight. If you are eating under or at your caloric intake, you should not gain weight just because you eat at night.
as for #10, sugar is food that enters your system quickly and gives you energy. When you have energy you potentially can do more stuff. This doesn’t have anything to do with hyperactivity. This can happen to kids and adults the same. Slower burning foods with less sugar may not cause the same affect. This is well documented.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Excellent comments today guys – I really enjoyed reading them. It is interesting how many people disagree with some of the items, but it hasn’t led to nastiness which is good
February 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Jeez… Sorry for my gross typos in my #55 comment. Newish keyboard.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
And oldish stupidity.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
To all those people insisting that too much sugar rather than food additives is making their children hyperactive, I say…Congratulations! Regardless of what the cause is, apparently your children are not consuming vast quantities of sugar and/or additives on a daily basis or you would not be noticing any behavorial changes at all! I wonder if part of the “hyperactivity” is also due to the excitement of the occasions when they get more sweets – Christmas, Halloween, Grandma’s visit. But this is just a guess; I am not a doctor nor do I play one on the internet.
Regarding ADHD, I think that part of the controversy is due to the fact that in the US a child can receive Social Security benefits if they are both diagnosed with ADHD (inattention, impulsiveness and hyperactivity) and have impairments with social, cognitive or personal functioning. I don’t think most people do not think that ADHD exists, but rather they realize that a complete lack of parenting attention will almost certainly lead a child to have the same symptoms as ADHD, at which point the parents would be rewarded financially for their neglect. Interestingly, I can imagine situations where a child with ADHD would not qualify for benefits, due to devoted parenting, trained teachers, etc. preventing them from being socially impaired whereas the neighbors who let their children run wild would indeed end up with personally impaired, inattentive, impulsive children.
February 16th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
79. siav
Incorrect. The amount of tryptophan that is in turkey is hardly enough to make a person sleepy. In fact, while it is high in trypotophan levels compared to some other foods, it doesn’t contain much more than most meats.
The reason a person gets sleepy after eating turkey is that the consumption of the meat is usually associated with big meals. Just like if you ate a supersized big mac meal, your body is going to slow down so that it can concentrate the enegry into digesting the food you’ve consumed.
Do you get sleepy after eating a turkey sandwich at lunch? I think not.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
#7 Last year I paid for medical surgery for one of my female employees. She had a nasty habit of swallowing chewing gum and not spitting it out. Over the past 8 months or so her mid section had been getting noticeably larger and she was absenteeism was increasing because she was feeling ill. As she does remedial work and earns a low salary, I send her for a check up and I foot the bill. Turns out she has to have surgery to remove a ton of old chewing gum from her transverse colon and other places I didn’t even know existed. They even had to remove a section of it that was infected.
#6 – just off the top of my head.. arthritis is not the same as osteo arthritis, the latter is the disappearance or damage of a certain cartilage of joint. Clicking ones knuckles dramatically speeds up its Deterioration, for which there is no reversal.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
I used to get horrible twitches at night before bed when I would eat too much sugar and I couldn’t sleep. So I still question number Ten. Number nine, I get very hot when I wear a hat I wear a hat around my parent house, they keep their heat at 60 degrees, the hat keeps me very warm. Maybe most of your body heat is not lost from your head, but keeping your head covered keeps in the heat! I enjoyed reading these though! Great information here.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Weight gain bonus sounds like a myth. I would like to see the science reference behind it.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:43 pm
60. Phil: “Of course, they were 9 months, 18 months, and 26 months, so I could just bounce them back, out of my way, but it way funny.”
How exactly is it possible to have children at those ages? Adoption?
****
The 26 months was a typo. Should have been 29 months. They were all born to me, all natural births.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
still Segue – jeeeez
February 16th, 2009 at 3:25 pm
#34 MT, “You’re not a teacher…”
Not the kind you’re used to, apparently.
“you’re an ass. Please find another career quickly! (And take that idiot Frank with you).”
Ah. A well reasoned, thoughtful response. It strengthens my position quite a bit, I must say. Perhaps the truth hits a little too close to home?
February 16th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
You missed thew biggie jfater! “Getting Wet And Staying That Way Will Cause You To Catch A Cold”
How often have we been told “get out of those wet clothes before you catch cold!”??
A conbined Oxford/Cambridge study back in the early 80’s proved beyond doubt this one wa false. They took 20 people and over time soaked them with water of varying temperatures and made them remain in them in environs of varying temperatures, occasionally they had to sleep (try to) in wet beds in cold rooms, doused with frigid water and put in a hot room and so on — for TWO WEEKS. Not one of them developed a cold. They then introduced a 21st ‘control individual’ who was recovering from a cold into the group and ceased all the other experiments and within 24 hours over half the subject group had developed a cold to one degree or another!
February 16th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
#43 ChickyBee
But the immune system will remember, so no, once the germs are known and it doesn’t mutate, then the turd-factory can put the same thing in its mouth with the same germs and not get sick anywhere near as bad as the first time, if they get sick at all.
It does sound bad, but thing is, to be a healthy individual you must train your immune system to deal with these germs. Pre-school environment is the real training ground for infants. (and parents that have not been exposed yet to such versions of the germs)
February 16th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Ya the whole weight thing is crazy. People complain of not being able to lose weight, I have lost 7 pounds in 3 hours for wrestling before.
February 16th, 2009 at 3:48 pm
This guy does not know wtf he is talking about and im not leaving a donation for this bs lol
February 16th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
#84 Life
You point about some foods don’t make you fat. All foods get converted to usable energy for the body, but ifyou don’t use it, you’ll store it. Not necessarily as fat but it may replenish glycogen stores temporaily before getting shifted to the ‘turn this into fat store’ assembly line.
The reason you MAY be fatter with eating food just before bedtime is due to your body winding down and getting ready to sleep. Yes, light foods (mainly sugary treats) raise the blood sugar level quickly (HELLO to Point #1) and give you a burst of energy, but you don’t use that energy so it goes into storage
I’m not a nutritionist so i don’t know how quickly it get transformed to lipids… add to that food before bedtime = i don’t know enough to say yay or nay.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
#103 General
You would have lost water (sweating) if it was such rapid weight loss.
Fat takes longer to ‘burn’, but in saying that, you are burning a percentage of fat as soon as you start up (although small). “Hitting the wall” is when your easy availble enrgy (glycogen, amongst others) and you are burning fat more and more you deplete you glyco. Keep hydrated and you can wrestle longer, keep your sugar (incl. electrolyes) up and you’ll wrestle stronger.
… did that make sense? i hope so.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
JFray~
as a compulsive knuckle cracker, I have to disagree with your satement concerning the worst thing that could happen to us…
“the worst that can happen to a compulsive-cracker” is that they get lynched by an angry mob of African Americans!
rtr
February 16th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
I can explain #7.
No doubt a study was done where a stomach acid analogue was used, and a piece of bubblegum was dropped into it. Using measurements of weight over a period of time, it was extrapolated that it would take 7 years for it to dissolve in it’s entireity.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Fabulous list.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
#108 Jono
The obvious example why #7 is so wrong is due to the ‘what goes in, must come out’
Eat a pound or corn kernels and work out how long it takes * before you have the urge to explode on the toilet. Gum is no different to the shealths of the kernels when passing thru.
* i don’t want to know, eek!
ANOTHER MYTH: that fecal matter remains in the large intestine and builds up over the years!
February 16th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
As long as this list is debunking myths, it should be noted that the research for #10 was not done by Drs. Vreeman and Carroll. They simply went through the medical literature to find research on a handful of common beliefs (including #9 and #1) to determine if they were true or not. See http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/337/dec17_2/a2769.
February 16th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
I have to say that I disagree with a few of them. As far as the body heat one, the idea that you lose most of your body heat through your head is not incorrect. Often, people do not cover their head, thus exposing it. I do not know many people who walk around naked in the winter. Also, the head contains many more openings than any other part of your body. You have the pores in the skin, ears, nostrils, eyes are exposed, and of course the mouth. Living in a cold climate all my life, I must say, you most certainly feel a difference going outside wearing a hat versus not wearing a hat. Also, the one about eating before you fall asleep, it is not healthy for you as you are not moving around as much to burn off the calories. You should not eat anything 2-3 hours before going to bed. Maybe I am incorrect, but using myself and my roommates as a study. I do not eat less than 2 hours before bed while my roommates eat right up until they go to lay down. I have a 6-pack, they have plenty of extra stomach fat and we all exercise roughly the same amount doing the same workouts and have very similar builds.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
101. Bigwig Rabbit
I agree totally with MT. You know nothing about ADHT or children. Exactly what backwoods home school are you associated with?
February 16th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
100. TEX: still Segue – jeeeez
****
Wot? You think I should have a different screen name for each list?
February 16th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
100. TEX:…Segue…
****
BTW. It’s segue, not Segue. Notice the difference? segue/Segue. Think on that a while. There will be a test.
February 16th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
27. BigwigRabbit
Hooray someone else mentioned the ADD/ADHD controversy. I read heard a TEDTalk about some girl who was a problem child in school and the mother went to doctor after doctor trying to find the solution. Though she had classic ADHD symptoms this was prior to the ADHD diagnosis/epidemic so they said there was no help for her. One smart doctor left the girl in the office with the radio on while the mom and doc went to the hallway. They watched the girl dance in the room and the doctor said “See? There’s nothing wrong with your child. She simply needs to dance.” Anna Pavlova became one of the world’s prima ballerinas. I believe that these symptoms can be taken care of with alternative approaches to the problem rather than giving them drugs that many inevitably sell to other kids (I was approached with recreational ritalin as early as 8th grade). It’s harder, yes…but that’s mostly because our society isn’t outfitted to accept those who don’t fit the mold.
To the numerous posters about Losing weight being harder:
J was describing the physical aspects of burning energy from food sources (and I agree with what’s written there. The digestive system is like a machine and with a routine, the results should be similar to what is stated above). What posters are describing is mental anguish of losing weight and random unroutine behaviors like dieting. Losing weight IS as simple as changing decades-old patterns and habits AS LONG AS you’re open to changing the lifestyle. There’d be some physical hardships as far as your body getting used to eating less and acclimating to lower levels of junk in your body, but that’s what your body normally undergoes when it’s trying to get clean of any addiction. That’s right, I likened the 14 packs of twinkies to the 2 packs of Marlboros. Diets don’t work because they are temporary fixes and usually entice dieters to binge on the “naughty” foods when they break diet but make a consistent lifestyle change and your body acclimates to the new routine.
Regards to backs…My best friend’s just weeks away from her PT boards. She says the somewhat new mantra in physical therapy is less rest and more light movement. Rest does help but you get plenty of that during sleep on a well supported bed. The problem with bedrest for many mild to moderate injuries is that people tend to overdo it, which can lead to lactic acid build up and (in more serious cases) muscle atrophy. Besides, if you’ve got a strong core (ahem, and you technically should) you can still manage light chores with a sore back.
Just because a list says it’s ok, don’t do away with water altogether! We do gain liquids from foods but (especially nowadays) we eat an enormous amount of sodium. Sodium imbalance can lead to dizziness and edema (painful water retention, especially in the legs). On the other hand, too much water is also bad because of the sodium imbalance. Hyponatremia is a common danger for marathoners.
It’s all about balance….
February 16th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
*114…I wrote Anna pavalova, it was actually Gillian Lynne.
I just watched a documentary that had a bit about Pavalova and it was probably still on my mind.
But I just relistened to Sir Ken Robinson’s Ted Talk. If you can find the clip online, listen to it. “Do Schools Kill Creativity?” It’s very funny.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
I have to chuckle when parents disagree with proven scientific information – as if they know better than people devoting their lives to the study of the effects of sugar on children.
The human body is a wonderful thing and is homeostatic – that is it attempts to keep itself within optimum working levels. Within a few minutes of excess sugar being detected in the bloodstream, insulin is secreted so cells take up the excess sugar. When blood-sugar levels are low then glucagon is released into the bloodstream where it is converted to glucose, raising sugar levels. This feedback loop keeps sugar levels within reasonably narrow limits. To see the REAL effect of too much sugar in the blood stream and “sugar rushes” then speak to a diabetic or someone who has experienced hyperglycemia.
I believe the received wisdom now is that it is additives and various E numbers that are present in things like chocoloate, fizzy drink etc, that children consume which are responsible for the children being ‘hyper.’
As a personal aside, has anyone thought it was just kids being kids, rather than having to blame their behaviour on some third party or illness. I know this is going to get some parents riled up but hey.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Anybody else feel weak after reading the knuckle cracking one?
February 16th, 2009 at 6:43 pm
#114 Dole, Yes, your response is just as astute.
February 16th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
117. gabi319: Couldn’t agree with you more on the ADD/ADHD scenario.
I had 3 children in under 3 years (yeah, on purpose). When they’d be overly active in the classroom and the teacher would complain to me about their “hyperactivity”, I’d tell them that the children were just bored, and to give them more advanced work to do. It always worked.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
119. cymraegbachgen87: I have to chuckle when parents disagree with proven scientific information – as if they know better than people devoting their lives to the study of the effects of sugar on children.
****
LOL! I completely agree. The reason I kept sweets from my young children was not because they would become “hyper” (I knew that was rubbish), but because I didn’t want them developing a taste for sweets before they developed a taste for the things that were good for them.
It worked, too! To this day they prefer broccoli to peas, fresh fruit to cake.
There was the chocolate espresso bean incident, but that was a mishap, and one we still laugh over.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Tony Dee – That makes more sense now. And as for the sounding bad bit – I’ve lost friends who are horrified by my habit of letting my son play in the dirt, sample the occasional dog biscuit and the household’s strict adherence to the ‘10 second rule.’ Gross occasionally, but what kids aren’t?
cymraegbachgen87 – But the only people who are more often right than parents are customers! And MY child is special, none of the proven facts apply!
February 16th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
LOVE this list! Great info.
Though I have to disagree with the “bonus” entry.
It is indeed easier to eat 3500 calories than it is to burn 3500 calories.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:41 pm
Considering how many different kinds of back pain there are, you can’t really dismiss sleep as bad for all of them.
February 16th, 2009 at 8:29 pm
Even if a cancer can’t be cured it is a manageable illness now. With the right treatment a person can live much longer and enjoy life.
The water thing is to encourage people to drink water rather than a high calorie drink or one with caffeine It doesn’t have to be bottled. I fill a stainless steel container with tap water for an “on the go” drink
February 16th, 2009 at 8:33 pm
damn now i’m going to call my mother and tell her i so can eat midnight snacks and i’ll be totally alright.
geez all these years i’ve been told i can’t midnight snacks cause i’d get fatty fatty
February 16th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Turkey does contain L-tryptophan, an essential amino acid with a documented sleep inducing effect. L-tryptophan is used in the body to produce the B-vitamin, niacin. Tryptophan also can be metabolized into serotonin and melatonin, neurotransmitters that exert a calming effect and regulates sleep.
Our bodies are made up of a good deal of water. It makes up on average 60 percent of our body weight. And it seems to enable our basic functions.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
I’m so glad with #1
Whoo~eee!!
February 16th, 2009 at 11:06 pm
Rascalian @15 I totally agree with you. My friend always will say “stop popping your knuckles your going to get arthritis” I always proceed to tell her no I won’t that is just the sound of the gas bubble breaking. At this point she gets upset and says ” fine well just stop it then it annoying.”
February 16th, 2009 at 11:13 pm
People are stupid. That is why these illogical myths are ever believed.
February 16th, 2009 at 11:26 pm
Yeah…with #10, if you consume a lot of sugar, your blood glucose goes up, and we all know that hyperglycemia makes you what?
FATIGUED.
So actually quite the opposite occurs.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:44 am
A funny list.
ad #5:
), and I won’t claim that teething and fever are statistically correlated over a significantly large group of children.
Having gone through teething with two kids I can say that at least with those two kids there was a clear correlation between teething and fever. I won’t say the teething caused the fever (or the fever caused the teething
Still, those two kids got fever every time the teethed.
m.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:48 am
number 10 is not fully correct… if a child drinks a coke and eats 5 or six pixie sticks and a chocolate bar that kid will be bouncing off the walls…but that is the caffeine and i am sure that sugar has some type of effect due to the fact hummingbirds drink nectar to remain so hyper…Hummingbirds feed on the nectar of plants. Like bees, they are able to assess the amount of sugar in the nectar they eat; they reject flower types that produce nectar which is less than 15% sugar and prefer those whose sugar content is around 25%. With the exception of insects, hummingbirds while in flight have the highest metabolism of all animals, a necessity in order to support the rapid beating of their wings. Their heart rate can reach as high as 1,260 beats per minute. They also typically consume more than their own weight in nectar each day, and to do so they must visit hundreds of flowers daily. At any given moment, they are only hours away from starving…this makes me believe that sugar can lead to hyper activity…
February 17th, 2009 at 5:48 am
I think number 6 and 7 are related. If you swallow bubblegum, then you will do popping sounds with your knuckles. It’s scientific.
February 17th, 2009 at 10:38 am
Super hyperactivity is not bogus. I’ve heard of studies that link ADHD to prolonged levels of food coloring in a child’s diet.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:03 am
I know a kid with ADHD.
With his aunt and grandad he doesn’t have it because they refuse just treat him like a naughty child.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:03 am
they reufse to reat him differently**
sorry typo lol, well missed words
February 17th, 2009 at 11:10 am
Just to clear up my own mistake: I said that if you take it easy, hopefully the joints of the back will realign in time. Obviously this was a rash mistake (and having a diploma in anatomy and physiology) can report that most back problems are due to inflammation of the ligaments or muscles, sometimes the joints and sometimes trapped nerves. Still, taking it easy can still help by letting the inflammation heal.
Silly me. It seems so long ago since I studied this stuff.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:15 am
The sugar is psychological rather than medical because sugar is associated with rewards such as birthday parties and other events therefore, when children are “hyped up” it is due the the excitement of getting the sugar or being at the event. I think people have a hard time excepting number 10 is because they don’t like the phrase of “all in the parent’s head.”
February 17th, 2009 at 11:27 am
The problem with myth number 1 – Eating at night makes you fat. The problem is it assumes everything else remains the same – you body burns the same amount of calories, you do the same amount of activity, and you eat the same amount of calories.
If you wait until just before you go to bed to eat, you’ll likely be hungrier and eat more. I’ve seen lots of places advise eating 6 small meals a day instead of 3 bigger meals – the idea is you will eat less, and you body metabolism will stay higher.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
In reference to #5, I thought I had read somewhere that teething is so hard on a baby it weakens the immune system, thus opening the gates for any homeless virus looking for a host. This would explain why most teething babies get fevers. My daughters, without fail, always would have runny noses when they teethed. I agree with JFrater’s advice though, get the baby checked by the doc anyway.
February 17th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Weight Gain
Increasing your exercise routine activity increases muscle mass which in turn demands more energy in order to feed it. The consequence is an initial weight loss in the feeding and building of existing muscle mass, however, as more muscle is built up … the more you will weigh … since muscle is heavier than fat (for the same volume). Anticipate an initial weight loss…but if your regimented….also expect an increase in weight. At this point in time, drop the scale and invest in a full leangth mirror.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:18 pm
#9 is just dumb. Unless you live in a warm country, you ARE normally fully clothed except for your head. So yes, normally you do lose most of your body through your head…
February 17th, 2009 at 1:20 pm
Well I have so much trouble losing weight, and I believed the myth about the weight. So I would eat all day and then stop eating after 6. Now I see why I wasn’t losing any weight. Thank you for the list. Jfrater, you might have just saved me from a huge weight gain.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
you’re wrong, half of those “facts” are wrong, did you just come up with those off the top of your head? moron.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:44 pm
A close friend had a boy who was continually wild — and that’s not an exaggeration. He was the epitome of hyperactive, out-of-control snot.
Well, my friend and his wife did some investigation and wound up eliminating “red dye #5″ (I think that’s the one) from the boy’s diet. It’s found in many things kids like. What happened? Near-complete transformation. The boy is now much more calm and collected and nowhere near as destructive.
February 17th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Whoops, it’s Red Dye #40.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Do you know how hard it is to burn 3,500 calories? Thats the hard part.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:31 pm
For 5, both my kids got teething fevers, right on schedule. It was funny talking to the nurse, who acknowledged the fevers were caused by teething and so nothing to worry about, but insisted in the next breath that there was no such thing as teething fever.
Number 10 has been well-explained: the universally observed hyperactivity is caused not by the sugar, but by the artificial colors that almost always accompany the sugar. Most of the artificial colors in use were grandfathered in when the FDA began regulating additives, and were therefore not obliged to pass any tests.
Number 1 and the “bonus” are typical of the substitution of trivial arithmetic for experimentation, pretending that living creatures are like bank accounts. Suffice to say that lots of things affect metabolic rate.
Lists of myths dispelled are a common source of new myths.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:05 pm
I wanna pop in and comment on the ADHD comments. To whoever believes it “doesn’t exist”…you are wrong. I do believe that it is overdiagnosed, and medication isn’t always the answer, but I worked for 6 years at summer camps/after school programs, and over the years we had a number of kids with ADHD. Even on their medication there were certain things we had to handle differently with them. For example discipline…where most kids we would have sit on a “time out” when they got into trouble, that didn’t work for the kids with ADHD, so instead we’d have them do pushups or run a lap around the building, and it worked quite well.
Also, I dealt with the same kids during school year as summer sometimes, and often parents would take their kids off meds during summer, and there was a significant difference in them during summer off their meds than how they acted during school on their meds.
February 17th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
153. DK: You’re right, of course, but the sad part is that far too many parents with normally active children, just didn’t want to deal with what is normal for a four year old, or an eight year old, or an eleven year old…which is very, very active! So a whole lot of children got misdiagnosed as having ADHD and were put onto meds so that Mommy and Daddy could have a less stressful life.
I’m sorry folks, but when you became parents, you signed on for whatever got dished out.
You’re the grown-ups, you’re supposed to handle it.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
THE BABY IS ADORABLE!!!!
February 17th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
119. cymraegbachgen87
I never finished that biology degree but I still tend to side with facts rather than family anecdotes as grounds to refute a statement.
I like how you put the science behind the facts in your post.
123. segue
Hooray for you taking an aggressive and early approach to your kids’ eating habits! I’m a strong advocate of putting off junk food and fast foods. I know I’d be crazy mom to ban McD’s altogether, but I at least want to put it off a number of years until my (future) kids have established a strong dietary foundation not covered in grease and preservatives.
My goddaughter is 2 and a half and is already obsessed with her 8 am sodas and frequent mommy-and-me trips to Taco Bell. It’s not the sugar that’s the problem. It’s the junkfood obsession (she’s as giddy over a sippy cup of mountain dew as she is with a rubbery beef patty from McDonald’s). I’ve tried to give her apples and other fruits but she’ll kick and fuss until they hand her a bag of Skittles. The kid has more cavities in her 2 and a half year old mouth than I had my entire life.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Well, number one is definitely true, I think you misunderstood the myth, JFrater. When you sleep right after you eat, you wont burn any of the calories from the food, when you will burn some amount if you eat during the day or in the morning. So, eating at night will make you fatter. Its really simple. Im glad you put the bonus on there haha. Other than number one, this was a good list.
February 17th, 2009 at 5:36 pm
156. gabi319: gabi, I never, ever gave my kids fast food or soda or sugary cereal. I never brought candy or cookies into the house. They considered that normal. They ate sliced red or yellow bell peppers as a snack, or apples, or pomegranates.
My children never had a cavity or a weight problem. Now, as adults, they still prefer to eat the way I taught them, and my 2 year old granddaughter is being fed exactly as I fed her mother.
I was a very, very young mother, but I knew what was right. What you feed your children is what they become. I kept it pure and clean and free of additives and sugar. It was wholesome and they were never sick.
I’m glad you’re thinking ahead, gabi! Having a child is the biggest commitment you’ll ever make. There are no do-overs. You’ll be great!
February 17th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Love the big googly eyes on that baby
I never did believe that one about knuckles! As an often-chastised knuckle-cracker, I feel kinda vindicated.
February 17th, 2009 at 6:42 pm
Someone appreciates my posts
:D:D yay! Thanks gabi!
February 17th, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Number 10 (kids & sugar) and number 8 (water consumption) are related. Give your kids minimal food and water, and you will have perfectly behaved children. I and my 12 siblings are living proof this works. ALL of us were A-one zombies during childhood because we were dirt poor & many’s the time I heard people say to my mother “They’re so good – how do you get them to be so quiet?” I don’t think she ever figured out it wasn’t her brilliant mothering that kept us so subdued – it was because none of us ever got enough to eat or drink. I don’t advocate this method of child control, and no blame to Mom, she did the best she knew how, but I wonder about the correlation? Any thoughts out there?
February 17th, 2009 at 7:55 pm
160. cymraegbachgen87
I laughed a little when I read that.
Thanks for appreciating my appreciation!
125. waty, 51. Higgs, and the oodles of others over the burning/eating calories…
Even with a sedentary lifestyle, the body burns between 1500-2000 calories a day to digest foods, to maintain core body temp and healthy organ function. The range is for wide to give account differences for individual’s energy needs (for example, pregnant women actually need 2500 calories) but this is a decent average. Yes, it is hard work to burn 3500 calories a day but it’s actually not impossible. It would require about four hours of moderate exercise – hitting the gym, walking the dog, climbing the stairs instead of taking the lift, walk more and sit less…
It feels easier to eat 3500 calories because of food choices. A big mac has nearly 800 calories, a large soda I’m guessing is approximately 200 and large fries is another 250…that’s 1250 calories in on meal! But if you took out the misguided notion of “saving time” by getting fast food and attempt the 3500 challenge with healthier choices like, oh say an apple… A moderate sized apple is about 100 calories. 350 apples in one day sounds excessive even for a foodathelete or whatever they are called. Gigantic salad entree with small amounts of homeade dressing would add up to probably 300 calories. Wheat bread sandwich with lean chicken and toppings maybe 300 calories. Homemade granola bars (too many storeboughts have excess sugar and fillers) depending on the size would be about 160 calories and fill you up longer than that Lo Mein at the corner Chinese take-out. …see where I’m getting at?
Attempt the US FDA food pyramid – 6 servings breads, 5 servings fruits (SERVINGS not types! That’s important!), 5 servings veggies, 2-3 of meats, 2-3 of dairies – A DAY. A friend of mind tried it and couldn’t eat all recommended servings because it was too much food. And I bet her day didn’t exceed more than 2400 calories. I’ve tried just the fruits and veggies challenge and I surrendered before dinner rolled around. I felt bloated and unaccomplished.
February 17th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Ive been one of those people who could never gain weight. Im trying to eat 3000 to 3500 calories a day and it isnt easy. If youre going to gain weight eat a lot of meat and protein. Bodybuilders go for at 1-2 grams of protein per pound of body weight, which is fucking crazy. But I swear, I loose weight when I eat junk food. Ive only been able to gain weight when I eat real food, like meat n potatoes.
February 17th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Not all human bodies are alike, so I don’t think you can really say “it’s as simple as that!” about weight loss. For example, I have a sister who eats anything she wants (fast food, candy, cake, whatever) and never ever exercises. She weighs 105 pounds. She has always eaten more than I do, even when we were children. As a teenager, she was very underweight despite eating constantly.
I ride my bicycle more than 80 miles a week, in addition to strength training and aerobic dancing. I watch what I eat–sticking mostly to fresh fruits and veggies, whole grains, and lean chicken and fish–and I don’t have a big appetite to start with, so I eat small meals.
I am the same height as my sister, and I weigh 35 pounds more than she does. I’m not saying it isn’t possible to lose weight by eating less and getting more active; I’m just saying that human bodies differ, and things don’t work exactly the same way for everyone who has ever lived.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Where are Jemaine and Bret?
February 17th, 2009 at 11:39 pm
@gabi319
I appreciate (and agree with) your efforts to introduce a healthy diet to the masses who need one. But that doesn’t change the fact that I can sit on my ass and engulf 3500 calories without moving. EASILY. Now, what is it I have to do to BURN 3500 calories? … ow, that sounds hard.
February 18th, 2009 at 12:08 am
166. waty
I am in no way forcing a new eating habit on anyone. If I were, I’d have an easier chance of success by preaching in front of the Burger King next to the gym rather than a comment list, right? :-p I’m just pointing out the math behind these calories and the logic behind . What you mention (and the passive-aggressive Kessie…I have no idea if that post was directed at me but I assume so since I was the one with the “simple as” blah blah blah) is personal preference and anecdotes. I wouldn’t use one single person as my definition of “average of x” or “range of y”.
Adding my own personal preferences…sitting on my ass not moving sounds hard! On occasion, I’ll pause the tv just so I can take care of some dishes or grab my sketchbook. Or burn the couch and head outdoors. I can’t put up with prolonged inactivity, haha.
163. Ryan
I have a friend in a similar situation. He has an incredibly high metabolism and is an extremely competitive swimmer. He’d eat an insane amount of food – some healthy, plenty not (his main objective was filling up not specifically on what…and besides, this was high school) but when competitions rolled around, he was burning way more than consuming. It was bad enough that his body was consuming muscle when it ran out of other energy sources. When that happened, he smelled BAD…
February 18th, 2009 at 12:40 am
167. gabi319–
I am truly sorry I came off as passive-aggressive; I hadn’t actually read down as far as your comment. It’s the list itself that says “it’s as simple as that,” and that is what I was responding to. (I quote: as long as you eat only the total calories that you burn each day, you will not gain weight. If you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight, and if you eat more calories, you will gain. It is as simple as that. I don’t strongly disagree, but it struck me as a bit overly simplistic.)
I am absolutely all for healthy diets and abundant exercise. America needs that very badly right now. I just think people (not aimed at any one person, I swear) might sometimes simplify a bit too much. Human bodies are not mass-produced internal combustion engines. There is variation in the way our bodies handle the calories we consume. It’s why some people who live healthy lives get mocked for being too thin and others who live healthy lives get mocked for not being thin enough.
(And I’ll drop this now, because I’m perhaps a bit over-sensitive about it due to personal experience.)
February 18th, 2009 at 10:50 am
These are scientific studies and those that are science grads understand what kind of validity these conclusions mean. I checked all of these out and bias in the outcome of any study was kept to a minimum. While I understand the importance of personal experience I must consider the source of said disagreement. Is the person disagreeing a medical doctor? Any kind of education at all? Like I said, personal experience should not be ignored but come on, my Mom swore up and down that my face would freeze if I kept up with my facial antics. Hasn’t happened yet although my trials are ongoing (lol).
February 18th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Rite btw see this whole number 10 thing and all you mothers out there.
1. Get your god complex out of your head, Mother does not always know best (It even says its in your imagination and i concur)
2. My wee sister is generally a disobiedant C*w! and i could give her as much sweets as she wants or none for long periods of time and she would still be her normal hyperactive anoying self.
Ps. Just remeber mother doesnt always know best.
-S-
February 18th, 2009 at 11:37 am
4got 2 say artificial colourings and flavourings cud be makin u kids hyper tho try giving them more natural shit.
Peace.
-S-
February 18th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Great Article, I did not know about the turkey!
February 18th, 2009 at 3:06 pm
oh gabi, you average little thing with a wide range of mathmatical ability..:) I wish I had your energy. But, unfortunately, I don’t. Which is why I’m intractable on my stance that it is easier to eat 3500 calories than it is to burn 3500 calories. (
February 18th, 2009 at 3:19 pm
173. waty
hahaha, thanks. I needed a laugh right then.
We can both simply ’shake hands’ and simultaneously say “Let’s agree to respect each others views, no matter how wrong yours may be.”
February 18th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
As a parent, I think it’s the additives and food colouring and not the sugar that makes my kids spin out. they can have a sweet breakfast of pancakes and maple syrup and not get spinny, but one piece of red candy and they are sick as hell
February 18th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
173. waty
got to agree with gabi319. Now to be fair my metabolism is fast as shit, but after doing hours of martial arts or wrestling (not only have I burned like a bizbillion calories) I am so tired I dont feel like eating. POW! simple way to stay skinny. Now putting weight on, thats something much harder. Sitting around all day sucks, I would much rather be playing some sort of sport
February 18th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
Nice list… I thought all of the list are facts but not!
February 19th, 2009 at 8:33 am
Funny to read people “disagreeing” with items #1 and #10 but using completely different fact patterns and scenarios… morons.
February 19th, 2009 at 6:59 pm
what about the myth that getting a cold in caused by going out in the cold.
February 19th, 2009 at 11:35 pm
This list is great! The comments are too numerous to read but I did read the first one and I have to disagree with comment 1.
I have a child who has never been told that “sugar makes you hyper” or any similar type of comment and his energy level stays the same after sugar as it was before.
It is psychological on both the parents and the children’s part. If a child believes they now have an excuse to behave wildly they will!
Bottom line is with children we must be very careful about what we preach!
February 20th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Re: Heat loss through the head
Of course we don’t lose heat from your head faster than anywhere else; the point is that we lose far more heat from your head than most people realize. Even taken with the military research, the point makes sense. We don’t tend to walk around completely naked very much (particularly in the outdoors), but many go without anything covering their heads. In this context, the old advice still makes plenty of sense: if you’re trying to keep warm in the cold, it’ll be much harder if you don’t cover your dome.
February 20th, 2009 at 10:35 am
I bet #158 never gave the kids any junk food because she spent all the money on dope. Poor kids. Maybe you should check the other places that you “blog” first to get your story right.
You pretty much comment on all of them don’t you.
There is nothing wrong with giving kids a limited amount of junk food. Get off the computer once and a while and get your Grandbabies a happy meal. They aren’t rabbits. Just plain stupid is all I can say about your comment.
Kids will grow up to become adults you know, and unless they plan on becoming a wilderness family or hippie commune dweller, They will start eating junk food on their own, and will find out what they are missing and resent the hell out of their parents for it. Just a plain old stupid way of thinking. Vegans DON’T live anylonger than those who eat a damn pop tart once in a while.
February 20th, 2009 at 11:08 am
Obviously these researchers never had sciatica pain. That is
the nerve leading from your spine to your leg. This is caused
when the spine has experienced a trauma and swelling cuts off
the nerve. Only the right anti-inflammatory & reducing the
pressure for a day or two will allow this to heal. Reducing
the pressure means laying flat with your knees elevated on
pillows. Not going about your normal business!!!
February 20th, 2009 at 11:09 am
182. Rinadee
It’s her personal preference to eat the foods she ate and provide the same foods to her kids. I didn’t decipher any thing between the lines that amounts to her chaining her kids in the basement to prevent them from McFlurries but perhaps my telepathy’s not up to par with your greatness… I’m sure her kids are capable of adult decisions, like whether to cook at home or eat out without fear of retribution from their mother. She made no mention of forcing her adult children to eat what they eat now but that they prefer to eat veggies.
What does her frequency of commenting, dope, or your predilection for stalking a long-term LVer like segue have to do with junk food or child rearing? If you’re going to insult someone at least use something pertaining to your argument because when you blow smoke out your arse, it looks ridiculous. Like for example, I glean from your post you are an anti-nature, pro-yuppie, meatatarian with a potentially gigantic ass because of your ‘once in a while’ pop tart. But perhaps it wasn’t as great an insult as yours because you think it’s probably just as plain stupid as segue’s comment, huh?
February 20th, 2009 at 11:11 am
183. Earthmom23
I think the more movement, less rest pertains more to mild to moderate pain from pulled muscles and such. A friend of mine has suffered from a number of slipped discs and I would never tell her the way to fix her back is to walk more!
February 20th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
182. Rinadee: I bet #158 never gave the kids any junk food because she spent all the money on dope. Poor kids. Maybe you should check the other places that you “blog” first to get your story right.
****
Boy, you’re a piece of work, aren’t you? Where did you get the idea I spent all of my money on dope? That would be an absurd assumption on your part. The only drugs I take are prescribed by my physician.
You ought to get your facts straight before you begin to condemn someone. Rinadee, people like you, who come in and slander longtime members of the community, are not well looked on, not well liked, and, unless they apologize and get their act together, not tolerated or welcomed.
February 20th, 2009 at 4:00 pm
Love the ongoing debate about sugar and children. My personal observations: children are naturally hyper, add any stimulation, or excitement and you get hyperactivity. If you feed the kids anything you’ve just given them energy, and again through personal observation i’ve noted that most children burn off energy by running, screaming, jumping around, and being generally annoying to the parents.
Personal experience about the knuckle cracking: when i was a kid i used to crack my knuckles all the time. Little old ladies in my church used to constantly warn me about the dangers of getting arthritis from this bad habit, which i never believed. Well when i was about 13 i was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. I asked my doctor, and he assured me my arthritis was not even closely related to my knuckle cracking. Ha, take that little old ladies! Where’s your old wives tales now? The irony is not lost on me, however. I cracked my knuckles like crazy, but can’t anymore, i have arthritis, lol!
February 21st, 2009 at 1:43 am
This entire list is an uneducated crock of shit.
February 21st, 2009 at 6:01 am
Number nine is just dumb. 10%, when considering the shear amount of surface area given by the rest of the naked body, is a lot for one area (the head). The mere act of breathing gives off body heat. What was written is simply flawed and was obviously not thought through.
February 21st, 2009 at 7:47 am
this list is mostly bollocks, this person doesn;t know wat their talking about
February 22nd, 2009 at 1:24 am
Much of this list is not true.
That’s probably why there are no references.
Do your own research, do not follow what is laid out here.
February 22nd, 2009 at 2:03 am
Graham, I couldn’t agree more. But, this is, more the rule, than the exception. How can anyone take a site seriously, that allows user names like Suckass. It started out well…
February 22nd, 2009 at 8:00 am
Wow, this list seems useless. It`s obviously good for publicity though!
As a mom of 2 very hyper (but perfectly normal) toddlers, I have seen a definite increase in “loose stools” and fevers during teething. Sugar doesn`t seem to affect them much, but I have seen it affect other kids. I suspect it`s like caffeine. I`m pretty much immune to the stuff, but others get jittery off a couple of cups . . . everyone has different tolerance levels.
Most of these myths have been bantered back and forth that it`s pretty hard to tell just what is real and what isn`t nowadays. There are studies proving each right and wrong . . . which is why I prefer to ignore most of them.
February 22nd, 2009 at 9:21 am
OMG Gen. Read other people’s posts. I have already explained why the sugar hyperactivity is a load of old bull – nothing to do with ‘tolerance levels’
To answer whatiswrong – this site is for a laugh. It is not a journal therefore doesn’t need to provide references. This is not a reference site. Take it in the vein it is meant.
Graham Green – this list is not true? Really? Which ones? I will be happy to debate you on them
Paul – same as above
As I said above in an earlier post, I really do laugh when people who have no scientific experience have a go at scientific results without providing repeated and repeatable evidence of their own.
February 22nd, 2009 at 10:56 am
Cymrae -
I only have time for point 1.
May I ask:
Are you a medical professional (I am not).
Have you ever worked for any company that would would benefit from the dissemination of any of this information such as a PR or marketing form, or a sugar producer, Big Pharma, or medical group?
Now, I don’t think I can debate every item (some I do not disagree with), I suggest everyone do that on their own.
Here is a study from the University of Oslo that disputes point 1 (I am defining ‘hyperactive’ in the layman’s sense, not by strict medical rules since that is how the article is presented):
“Consumption of Soft Drinks and Hyperactivity, Mental Distress, and Conduct Problems Among Adolescents in Oslo, Norway
…
Conclusions. High consumption levels of sugar-containing soft drinks were associated with mental health problems among adolescents even after adjustment for possible confounders.”
http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/abstract/96/10/1815
Now we can go study to study with each other, but I would submit to you that many pro-sugar studies are the result of funding by those who profit from the sale of sugar or the treatment of diseases caused by the ingestion of too much sugar.
So I ask the layman to simply do this. Go and eat a large amount of sugar. Does it make you feel ‘hyper’ or not? If the answer is yes, than regulate the sugar intake of your children accordingly.
Thank you and a very interesting list!
February 22nd, 2009 at 11:57 am
Effects of diet on behaviour and cognition in children.
Bellisle F.
Oct 2004
Review
“Deleterious behavioural effects have been suggested; for example, sucrose and additives were once suspected to induce hyperactivity, but these effects have not been confirmed by rigorous investigations”
Nutritional Rev. 1994 May;52(5):173-5.Links
Does sucrose or aspartame cause hyperactivity in children?
Kanarek RB.
“Although intakes exceeded average dietary levels, neither sucrose nor aspartame negatively affected behavior. Taken together with previous work, these results indicate that sugar is not a major cause of hyperactivity”
As both of these are reviews of all major studies into the area (with the second conducting their own experiment), I believe this sums up my viewpoint rather succinctly regarding sugar intake and children. Besides these, it is common sense that sugar cannot cause a sugar rush outside of diabetics – as I explained further up.
I would like to say that your view, Graham, is rather cynical (even if I do resonate with a slight grain of truth it contains). The first study is a european one, and europe is much better at securing the divide between good science and who is paying for your experiments. Besides this, reviews tend to be much fairer, as they have to use a large number of studies to glean a result – from groups on both sides of funding (i.e both health organisations and pro sugar organisations) Unfortunately, yours is an opinion much shared outside of the scientific community. I would ask you to bear in mind that all published works are peer reviewed, and where the evidence can point in both directions is where we do not know enough about the subject (Global warming etc). Eventually enough evidence is ammassed to allow a more singular viewpoint to be put forward, but then again science is always changing and at its heart is the ability to interpret data in different ways
As to my occupation, I am a research scientist in molecular biology and currently work for the British Heart Foundation – therefore I have a healthy knowledge of human anatomy and physiology especially at the molecular level
February 22nd, 2009 at 3:04 pm
196. cymraegbachgen87: Hooray, cymraegbachgen!
I’ve said, several times on this list, that I never gave my own children fast food or store bought sweets (cookies or candy). It wasn’t the sugar I was afraid of. It was the unknown additives and coloring agents, and what their effect might be.
February 23rd, 2009 at 4:19 pm
A number of these things are exaggerated.
There is a type of cancer that can be cured – skin cancer
And it’s not the tryptophan that makes you sleepy – it’s the MELATONIN in the turkey
Also, even though you don’t need to drink 8 glasses a day, as soon as you’re thirsty, it’s already too late – you are dehydrated
Don’t pretend you’ve done tons of research on something you haven’t looked into.
Thanks for nothing.
February 23rd, 2009 at 4:22 pm
And if your urine is so bleached it is almost clear, you are over-hydrated…probably from those 8 glasses of water.
In the original report (as mentioned in the list) the 8 was a measure of the number of glasses of liquid we consume. This includes water in fruit and food. Bodies are not arbitrary pieces of machinary. If you are thirsty, drink. If you are not and have only drank one glass of water that day…you don’t need any more liquid. Feeling thirsty is the body’s way of telling you it needs fluid.
Thank-YOU for nothing you mis-informed fool
February 23rd, 2009 at 4:25 pm
sorry..must apologise – only glanced at your post. I take back the fool point, although I still disagree with “if you’re thirsty you’re dehydrated”
Dehydration as a clinical term is far more serious than being thirsty
February 24th, 2009 at 5:12 am
Interesting, thanks. Also interesting is the large number of “educated arguments” to use the term loosly in the many and varied comments, some of which I have enjoyed reading
February 24th, 2009 at 10:55 am
concerning number 3, which is great to see included, perhaps an updated photo, of the newest platform for radiotherapy, TomoTherapy, would make more sense:
http://www.tomotherapy.com/
February 24th, 2009 at 11:06 am
man, this was dumb.
February 24th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
“It is better to be safe than sorry” is also a medical myth and logical fallacy.
Think vaccinations.
February 24th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
You know, I’ve actually tried to gain weight, to no avail. Mostly through snack foods. Just thought that was funny. :3
February 24th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Alleee? What about vaccinations? They save millions of lives a year. And how is “better to be safe than sorry” a logical fallacy?
February 24th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
dont agree with waiting untill your thirsty to consume water/fluid. thirst is a sign of dehydration and you should never allow yourself to become dehydrated.
February 24th, 2009 at 4:35 pm
While I agree with and had already recognized most of the medical myths above, I have to say that your cannabis myth section is for the mos part nothing more than pro-cannabis propaganda. I know from personal experience and seeing the damage to friends, family and fellow workers the seriously negative effect that this drug has on society. It is no better than alcohol and the fact that few people try to rehabilitate themselves is simply because most alcoholics don’t either. Few people recognize their own problems until they hit rock bottom. I unfortunately know several people that have been alcoholics their entire life without seeking help because they live a relatively normal life except for needing to drink several times a day or all day to keep the glow going. I also noticed that you don’t give any basis for the alleged facts about cannabis. Exactly what research and by whom??? What were there specific findings? Who did they use for test subjects, (university students). Who were the scientists and how many???
February 24th, 2009 at 7:36 pm
Kerry – if you have a problem with one of the lists, kindly post your opposition on THAT list rather than clogging up other comment boards with your moaning.
February 24th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
209. cymraegbachgen87: Maybe Kerry is under the influence of too much cannabis to know the difference.
February 24th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
198. Tammy – “Don’t pretend you’ve done tons of research on something you haven’t looked into.”
My response: Don’t pretend you’ve done tons of research on something you haven’t looked into.
“There is a type of cancer that can be cured – skin cancer”
That section was never posted as fact. It is posted as a MYTH being debunked. This statement is redundant.
“And it’s not the tryptophan that makes you sleepy – it’s the MELATONIN in the turkey”
You could’ve almost been right if you hadn’t added that extra bit to the end. Melatonin being discussed is NOT in turkey. The amino-acid tryptophan (in turkey) is a precursor of neurotransmitter serotonin (human hormone released by brain) which in turn is the precursor of hormone melatonin (found in various parts but in this context is created in the intestine). But the melatonin there is rarely taken out of the intestine as most organs have the ability to create their own. THIS melatonin is not likely to make you sleepy…your intestine perhaps, but not you.
“Also, even though you don’t need to drink 8 glasses a day, as soon as you’re thirsty, it’s already too late – you are dehydrated”
Overdramatic. There is no on-off switch for dehydration. There are levels in dehydration. Someone who thinks “hmm I’m a little parched…I think I’ll have a glass of water.” is in no way similar to a marathon runner who is in no way similar to a burn victim in the intensive care unit (who I’m sure is probably too focused on the pain of removing charred skin to recognize something like thirst). It is not too late for the “hmmm, I’m thirsty” and depending on the severity of the other two, they may not have physical ill-effects of dehydration if addressed in a timely manner.
And thank you for EVERYTHING! you see, I’m feeling quite argumentative today and I was just waiting and hoping someone to write some nonsense that I could rip to shreds.
…while on topic of nonsense to rip to shreds… Kerry, post in the cannibis list so I can tell you what a mess you are on the appropriate board.
February 25th, 2009 at 10:16 am
if the sugar thing WERE true each time I gave my kids a teaspoon of sugar to cure the hiccups they would be bouncing off the walls. sugar has a bad rap. it is connected with things like birthdays, parties ect that NORMALLY get a child excited. the other thing is many things with sugar in it have additives that are still being argued about as causing kids to be hyper.. this I agree with.
as for the teething ask the moms many kids do get sick one way or another when teething . maybe it lowers resistance or whatever.
February 26th, 2009 at 10:10 am
This list is garbage; so bad I can’t waste the time for a point by point rebuttal.
February 26th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
How about the one about hot temperatures making people irate and horny? Valid?
February 26th, 2009 at 5:06 pm
214. morgan77 – “How about the one about hot temperatures making people irate and horny? Valid?”
TMI, morgan….T.M.I.
haha
February 26th, 2009 at 6:03 pm
214. morgan77: How about the one about hot temperatures making people irate and horny? Valid?
****
Oh, sure. I never feel more sexy and attractive than when I’m dripping sweat and somewhat odorous.
February 27th, 2009 at 1:45 am
good, fantastic myth and I think you must also put some exception. Discountpharmacy.bz
February 27th, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I’ve always been notorious for my sweet tooth, but sugar never affected my sleeping patterns, nor did it make me ‘hyper’. :/
The same goes for my little girl and my little brother – sugar has no affect on them.
If it does have the ability to cause kids to be hyper, then I would think it would only be because it isn’t in moderation. Otherwise, I never believed that sugar is to blame for hyperactivity. Parents shouldn’t blame sugar for their kids being silly. Kids are pesky, energy-filled, wall-bouncers by nature.
Nice list, I enjoyed reading it. :]
February 28th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
The heat loss thing….
The real point being that in winter you are mostly clothed and not naked, the one thing many forget is that if they don’t ware a hat they are exposing themselves to heat loss.
Further tests done by the military (US Northern Warfare School) indicated that with two parts of the body exposed to the cold, torso and head, extremities and head, lower body and head, and all the iterations of the above the highest heat loss value was from the head in all experiments.
The order of loss
Head
Lower torso (legs and buttocks)
Extremities (hands arms, feet, lower legs)
Torso
The massive heat loss from the head is do the the massive amounts of blood in the head at anyone time, supporting the brain.
Heat loss from the lower torso was due to the surface area and quantity of blood at any given time.
Extremities, less loss due to the fact that as the body chills it slowly stops pumping volumes of blood to those areas.
and lastly the Torso, granted a large volume of blood and large surface area but it is the self-protecting core.
February 28th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
219. Swinson: Whatever the tests done might say (you say), I have always found that despite the temperature, if my torso is amply covered I can be bare-headed and wearing shorts. Maybe that’s just me, but it has worked that way all of mt life.
February 28th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
OldManGreen – comment#96 you are wrong ang clearly making stuff up to “impress” people. Well news flash, we cant be impressed because we don’t know who you are. STOP TALKING SHIT!!!
February 28th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
We cannot “cure” cancer. Remission, yes, but not a cure.
Sugar spikes blood glucose and does give you energy, hence why you “crash” after. Not the cause of Hyperactivity, but it does pep the system in children so to say it doesn’t cause Hyperactivity is misleading. As you tried to do with most of these things. Some have been proven without refute such as the one about water. Others are grey areas that you are trying to present as black and white. I don’t see any sources on any of this.
I agree with Mosha
“Not bad list, but a bit too anti-sensationalist for my liking.”
February 28th, 2009 at 11:23 pm
222. Meme
Technically there is a cure status. Remission is the five years after therapies are over. If, after those five years, you have no recurrences of cancer, you’re labeled “cured”. I’m still unsure if this is only in regards to chemotherapy and radiation therapy or if this includes hormone therapies. If you’d like I can verify with my mother’s oncologist.
Our interpretations of hyperactivity are different. You’re taking it from the socially-common vantage point of being more energized. I viewed it from the medical behavior involving a hormone-induced prolonged state of too much energy, lack of concentration, inability to sit still, emotional troubles, etc…or in short, the precursor to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Cym’s posted some good info above if you care to read it.
And I prefer anti-sensationlist reading. It provides less of a bias so there’s more room for my own.
March 1st, 2009 at 6:52 am
222. Meme: We cannot “cure” cancer. Remission, yes, but not a cure.
****
Of course some cancers can be cured. My husband, who had two different cancers in the same general area of his body 20 years ago, is alive and cancer-free. That is certainly a cure in anybodies book. He is absolutely *NOT* in a 20 year remission.
My best friend also had cancer. Had the operation, followed by chemo and radiation and 10 years later is still completely free of disease. Again, *NOT* remission, cure.
Childhood cancers are becoming more and more curable.
I suggest you get some good, valid information before you make such statements, it’s dreadfully important to the patient and their families to know the truth, not some falsehood that only hurts them.
March 1st, 2009 at 4:17 pm
I’m glad to hear about the cure status for cancer. Breast cancer runs in my family. I’m glad regular self examinations and early detection are not in vain.
March 1st, 2009 at 4:35 pm
224. segue – “My husband, who had two different cancers in the same general area of his body”
Two different cancers? Or did one metastasize to a new location? My aunt was recently diagnosed with Stage IV colorectal cancer that had metastasized to her liver and two small spots in her lungs. She underwent therapies and her PET scan showed she was clear. Then four months later, they found a tumor in her liver. I’m curious to know if it’s a continuation of her colorectal cancer or if she’s technically termed a liver cancer patient. She’s not too into the medical lingo so she doesn’t know.
March 1st, 2009 at 7:01 pm
226. gabi319: Two different cancers? Or did one metastasize to a new location?
****
gabi, first of all, I’m sorry to hear about your aunt. I’m sure her doctors know if it’s a met. or a new cancer, but I have no way of knowing.
With my husband it was absolutely two different diseases. They were caused by Agent Orange exposure in Vietnam.
March 2nd, 2009 at 4:43 am
Sorry but #1 & #10 are wrong.
#10 – I’ve observed sugar-related hyperactivity dozens of times. And on many of them, didn’t know there was sugar involved until after noticing the kids bouncing off the walls.
#1 – time of day is VERY relevant to eating. Your body burns recently eaten food first, stored fat second. If you eat & don’t burn it, you store it. So eating a large breakfast is fine, since you’ll be up and around for 12 to 16 hours afterward. But eat at 10pm, and your inactive body will begin to store it by morning.
How Americans can lose weight without exercising – NO fast food, minimize the fried food, refined sugar & white flour. And don’t eat after 8pm. That’s it.
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:09 am
Doug: Yes, but if you don’t eat breakfest, you burn fat. Then you eat what you usually would have for breakfast after 8pm and you restore all the fat you burned during the day, voila, same outcome…. Nice one mate, think it through before you post it.
Not to mention, if you want to call number 10 wrong, maybe get some better facts then “Because I saw it….”. Because jfrater obviously reseached his hypothesis, you obviously did not. I’m not saying you’re wrong, because I wouldn’t know. But no-one is going to believe you without some proof.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:21 am
228. Doug
….it’s been discussed time and time and time again in the above posts regarding the difference between personal anecdotes and scientific experiments. I know this isn’t a scientific publishing house but there are a good plenty here who have a scientific background and will refer to that as I will do now. In regards to your post…. so you “noticed them”? In a scientific study with a clearly defined hypothesis, control and experimentation groups as well as eradicating as many possible external variables as possible (location differences, differences in food, those with unique digestive concerns, etc.)? When it comes to deciding who’s information I would believe, I’d probably go with the dozens of scientist who in turn tested hundreds of kids and published papers on their works which were then perused, critiqued and tested time and again by their colleagues… as opposed to someone who observed it “dozens of times”.
Your thinking is slightly off in terms of fat storage. It is a good idea to eat a large healthy breakfast assuming you have the activities to match the food you are consuming for the next few hours. Disregarding those who can’t eat regularly because of environment, people will generally eat again for lunch and for dinner as well so they won’t be relying on that stored fat but on the newly masticated food as energy source. If we went your route and had a large breakfast and ONLY the large breakfast, your body would begin breaking down fats as energy source but also slow down your metabolism because it thinks there are no more food sources. The next time you eat again, it will pick up only slightly (not to the level of its original state) but also store significantly more as body fat in preparation for future food droughts. And while it’s true the US is the most obese country, you’re showing your conceit by failing to regard that they are CLOSELY followed by Mexico, UK, Slovakia, Greece, Australia and NZ respectively. Obesity is not localized to one country.
My sister more than occasionally works the overnight shift at the hospital. Of course, since you say so, I will tell her to stop eating at 8 pm because by 10 pm her body will begin to convert food into fat. When she gets off her 10 hour shift, I am sure she will be ecstatic that she listened to your advice.
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:28 am
O dear doug you are so unbelievably wrong I nearly passed out. Read our earlier posts for details. I’m not going to waste my breath repeating myself.
March 8th, 2009 at 3:20 am
I read raeding too many list gievs you mild dleitxa. That is just dipstu
March 9th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Cracking your knuckles if you have arthritis is bad but if you don’t have it it is good to crack them every now and then.
April 1st, 2009 at 7:18 am
This was such a good list, I used to believe almost all of these myths.. This one was really interesting
April 9th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
jfrater…how did u came out with all these information?
i’m guessing u’ve never been to med school.
well,u maybe right for some of the myths..but i do strongly disagree with 10, 8, 4, 3 ,1..
8: we need water not fluid.. infact,coffee and alcohol increases dehydation. dont wait til we feel thristy coz it’ll be too late. amount of water consumption differs from person to person..our urine colour should be a clear transparent colour. if its yellow or darker means not enough water!
4: No cure for cancer dude. docs can only try to delay the growth/recurrence. Cancer elements is already in the blood.
3: I’m guessing the back pain u mention is spondyloarthritis where exercise would release the pain instead of bed rest. The studies your talking about is on post-lumbar puncture? It depends on what is the cause of the back pain really..bed rest is important if someone is bleeding etc..
1: (i feel deeply about this one)
We have to adopt a good daily lifestyle and eating habits. Maintaining good eating habits and time condition are very important for our bodies to absorb and get rid of unnecessary chemicals according to “schedule.”
Because:
Evening at 9 – 11pm: is the time for eliminating unnecessary/toxic chemicals (detoxification) from the antibody system (lymph nodes). This time duration should be spent by relaxing or listening to music. If during this time a housewife is still in an unrelaxed state such as washing the dishes or monitoring children doing their homework, this will have a negative impact on health.
Evening at 11pm – 1am: is the detoxification process in the liver, and ideally should be done in a deep sleep state.
Early morning 1 – 3am: detoxification process in the gall, also ideally done in a deep sleep state.
Early morning 3 – 5am: detoxification in the lungs. Therefore there will sometimes be a severe cough for cough sufferers during this time. Since the detoxification process had reached the respiratory tract, there is no need to take cough medicine so as not to interfere with toxin removal process.
Morning 5 – 7am: detoxification in the colon, you should empty your bowel.
Morning 7 – 9am: absorption of nutrients in the small intestine, you should be having breakfast at this time. Breakfast should be earlier, before 6:30am, for those who are sick. Breakfast before 7:30am is very beneficial to those wanting to stay fit. Those who always skip breakfast, they should change their habits, and it is still better to eat breakfast late until 9 – 10am rather than no meal at all.
Sleeping so late and waking up too late will disrupt the process of removing unnecessary chemicals. Aside from that, midnight to 4:00 am is the time when the bone marrow produces blood. Therefore, have a good sleep and don’t sleep late.
April 9th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
234. amy – April 9th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
jfrater…how did u came out with all these information?
i’m guessing u’ve never been to med school.
****
Amy, you never bothered to say whether or not *you* went to medical school. Did you?
If so, where? Certainly not in a country which has English as it’s language. I’m just curious, because one of the topics you mentioned deals directly with me. I’d like to know how accurate the information is.
April 9th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
gah…. Amy, these were already addressed and reclarified in nearly EVERY SINGLE COMMENT above you. Don’t think you are so original that these haven’t been hashed out. In fact, I believe I’ve addressed each and every one of those and so have a number of other people.
I think the thing that bugs me the most about 234 is this no cure for cancer and the excessively long, strict schedule/rant of yours. There is a ‘cured’ status and my femurs don’t wear rolexes so I’m sure they won’t know when midnight – 4 am is. I have no idea if you are insinuating that you go to med school by insulting JFrat for not going to med school but if you are pre-med, med student, resident, or doctor, you should know that you wouldn’t have regular 9-5 day. Good spaced out nutritious meals when your natural rhythm needs it. Some cycles are reliant on night and day regardless of your hours but many others will adjust if say for example you work the overnight shift at the hospital like my sister does.
April 9th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
O I think amy WENT to med school. Whether or not she graduated is another matter.
Caffeine is a very mild diuretic – only slightly more so than water! Alcohol is a diuretic as it halts the production of the bodys’ anti-diuretic hormone. Hence the first two or three pints dont require a bathroom trip, but every half pint after that does
“No cure for cancer dude”
Right…so what are 35year olds who had leukemia as a child? Still in the grips of the disease?
“Cancer elements is already in the blood.”
Really? What are these elements? If a cancer has metastasised, then cancerous cells are indeed in the blood stream, but this is not a universal symptom of cancer.
Sugar hyperactivity has been dealt with above. To sumarise; a med school grad, such as yourself, understands the concept of homeostasis and negative and positive feedback mechanisms. Sugar can only fluctuate between certain boundaries (except in diabetics) where it is controlled either by glucagon or insulin. As I said above: Within a few minutes of excess sugar being detected in the bloodstream, insulin is secreted so cells take up the excess sugar. When blood-sugar levels are low then glucagon is released into the bloodstream where it is converted to glucose, raising sugar levels. This feedback loop keeps sugar levels within reasonably narrow limits.
“Sleeping so late and waking up too late will disrupt the process of removing unnecessary chemicals”
Why? The body doesnt stop working when you go to sleep. You are woken by the body when you need to remove these chemicals. Hence people wake up in the middle of the night to go to the toilet.
“Morning 7 – 9am: absorption of nutrients in the small intestine”
Wrong, wrong WRONG. The small intestine does not stop absorbing as long as there is stuff there to absorb!
“Evening at 11pm – 1am: is the detoxification process in the liver, and ideally should be done in a deep sleep
state.
More wrongness! The liver is in a constant state of detox.
“Evening at 9 – 11pm: is the time for eliminating unnecessary/toxic chemicals (detoxification) from the antibody system (lymph nodes”
Nope. Wrong again! (I love the lion king!) Once again this is a constant process
“detoxification in the colon”
Huh? What? I’m confused. It was my opinion, and my text books opinion, that the colon (large intestine) is where water is absorbed from faecal matter. Faeces is not ‘detoxified’ otherwise it would be sterile, like urine.
“Aside from that, midnight to 4:00 am is the time when the bone marrow produces blood”
Deary me that makes your entire post incorrect. The human body continually makes new erythrocytes at a rate of about 2 million per second. Hence it is safe to donate a pint or two of blood. We can easily compensate.
If you truly are a medical school graduate I am shocked, appalled and mildly insulted that they would give a medical degree to someone with such woeful medical knowledge.
See. I can do long posts too (sorry gabi)
April 9th, 2009 at 9:29 pm
Found more I dislike about your post!
“If during this time a housewife is still in an unrelaxed state such as washing the dishes or monitoring children doing their homework”
O dear the feminism movement was WASTED on you. You are making it sound that the only place for a woman is in the kitchen or monitoring children. Gabi, Segue…kill!
Besides, with school the next day, the kids should be in bed.
“Breakfast before 7:30am is very beneficial to those wanting to stay fit”
I would think EXERCISE is very beneficial to those wanting to stay fit. Eating times are a distant fifth; behind what you eat, taking care not to overstrain and drinking during exercise.
“We have to adopt a good daily lifestyle and eating habits”
Evolutionarily speaking, that statement makes zero sense. We ate when there was food available, and we gorged. Our bodies were very good at storing excess food (something that now, in a time of gluten and plenty is a major cause of our prolific weight gain as a species) We didnt have ‘times’ to eat.
What institution of further education did you grace with your insightful presence, may I ask? I will make sure I don’t send my children (if and when)
April 9th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
NICE job cym!
my feeling is that amy read a lot of “alternative medicine and detoxification” literature and took it as gospel. she forgot that even convention medical “wisdom” needs to be verified in double-blind studies (something conventional medicine forgot for a while too.) i think she needs do a lot more research.
April 9th, 2009 at 9:46 pm
Honestly, people like this are dangerous – lest other people take notice and believe them! lol. She makes it sound as if the body has a check list that it goes through one by one! How stupid!
You know LV has taken over when you are posting at 5am! (woops – should be asleep or I wont have enough blood to get through the day
)
April 9th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
237. cymraegbachgen87 – “See. I can do long posts too (sorry gabi)”
Apologies not necessary. I enjoy reading (and writing) long comments provided they aren’t filled with ignorant statements. Your two latest comments are nice rebuttals.
April 9th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
“Your two latest comments are nice rebuttals.”
Well I’ve had time off to rest my mind! Am itching for a prolonged fight…ahem…i mean debate – but no crazies can find the creationism page anymore
April 9th, 2009 at 9:55 pm
cym..thank you for that. With each sentence I read from amy, I felt my blood pressure go up. If she is a doctor…I want to know where, because I don’t want to go to that hospital.
Really…what kind of research did you do? I work from 7-4 so where do I fit into that schedule? As far as I can tell, I’m not a lab rat being ‘fed’ at scheduled times throughout the day. I have a busy life and a busy day at work. I eat when I don’t have a fire to put out.
Everyone of us can adopt a healthy lifestyle or eating habit, but as cym stated, it’s exercise that does the trick. Eating before 7:30 doesn’t do a lick of good if you are going to park your butt on the couch.
And as for the cancer comment….tell that to my friend. She’s 33 now. She had it when she was 4. No problems since and no cancer in her system now. That alone destroyed your comment.
April 9th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
cym, as you noticed, we kinda turned the creationism page into a cookbook! it’s more fun that way
April 9th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
242. cymraegbachgen87 – “but no crazies can find the creationism page anymore”
I keep trying to lure them over but no one’s receptive to my sweet overtures. I suppose “I will rip your stupidity to shreds” doesn’t appeal to everyone…
April 9th, 2009 at 10:08 pm
“Really…what kind of research did you do”
The post-translational effects of accessory proteins on the cardiac ryanodine receptor in regards to cardiac arrhythmia
April 9th, 2009 at 10:09 pm
245 – lol…just lol!
April 9th, 2009 at 10:12 pm
246. cymraegbachgen87….oops…I didn’t mean you. I hope you know that?
That was all for amy.
So heart attacks are your specialty? If so, what do you think about angioplasty? Is it worth it? Does it work?
April 9th, 2009 at 10:15 pm
248 – I know
Couldn’t resist showing off! Most regs know that anyway.
“So heart attacks are your specialty”
Nope.
The ryanodine receptor is my current specialty. In research science, you tend to get very VERY blinkered. Thats why we have weekly meetings – to see how our research fits in with others, and into the big picture.
April 9th, 2009 at 10:23 pm
cym…that’s neat. I had to read up on the receptors as I was not aware of it. Medical information is not my specialty. That would be my sister. My brother is in law enforcement and I am in financial. So we got all the bases covered.
April 9th, 2009 at 10:26 pm
I hope you read up in journals. I’ve read what is in wiki, and I’m shocked how wrong most of it is – its about 20years out of date!
My brother is an electrician, my sister a lawyer, my mother a school lab tech, my dad in IT – bases well covered over here too
April 9th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
Glad to hear it!
I hate wiki. It’s a waste of time for me to go to it. I had glanced at a few journals and saved 2 for me to look at tomorrow. It is actually sounds interesting. Which is saying a lot for me as I look at numbers all day.
April 9th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
ha, nope, neither of you have it covered! How would you eat? My mom’s a chef.
I WIN!
April 9th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
*It actually sounds interesting.
(Not being able to edit really sucks)
April 9th, 2009 at 10:36 pm
253. gabi319: darn, you’re right! My mom used to be one before her stroke. We joked that she was Betty Crocker, reincarnated. Now we all starve! (kidding here…since I have learned how to as well. Not nearly as good as her, though *sigh*)
April 9th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
perhaps we should stop oouchan… cym ran away from the creationist list because it became a cooking blog. Now it’s infiltrating to another list he frequents!
April 9th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
ahem once more! I did not “run away” I’ve been on holiday (nowhere exotic!) away from a computer.
April 9th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
gabi….hahaahaha! That was funny.
cym….but your back now…
Got any good recipes? (jk)
April 9th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
gabi is my editor, competitor, and tormentor all in one!
I have an excellent chili recipe actually. But I’m not going to share! American food is some of the best in the world – you lot hardly need my contribution
April 9th, 2009 at 10:49 pm
Does anyone become a better cook than their mum? I find homecooked food is always fantastic. ahhh the nostalgia…
April 9th, 2009 at 10:57 pm
Yup they do. My brother can out-cook anyone in our family. I come in second but my sister…her hubby does the cooking. Thank little apples that he does!
April 11th, 2009 at 7:42 am
*on the road*
cym! You were magnificent, my friend!
Little amy, playing doctor once too often with the boy next door, came to believe in her own soap opera…much to the soap’ s disgust.
Even I, who has only read quite a bit in the field of human anatomy, function, diseases, medical breakthrough’s, anthropology, (name your favorite human based science here), knows what amy puts out is nothing more than her own, warped opinion.
And “MOM” in the kitchen, helping with homework?
kay, I didn’t have a choice, it was me or no one, but if I’d had their father around, you bet he’d have been carrying his weight. There’s nothing magical in that double x gene that makes females automatically better parents. It helps, but it’s not the Magna Carta.
Get help amy. Get help soon.
April 12th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Thanks, segue! I needed to get all that off my chest!
On the road?
To where, may I ask?
April 12th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Oh, I’m just in Los Angeles visiting my son, one of my daughters, my brother, his wife, their two (one is an officer aboard the Enterprise), and my sister-in-law.
Be home tomorrow night.
Yea!
April 13th, 2009 at 9:24 pm
I think you should change the cancer one. There is no cure, only treatments. When someone’s cancer goes away, they are in remission. The cancer can always come back. That’s why scientists want a cure for cancer. Because there isn’t one. Other people have commented on this.
April 14th, 2009 at 4:27 am
265. Car-ell – “I think you should change the cancer one. There is no cure, only treatments. When someone’s cancer goes away, they are in remission. The cancer can always come back.”
wrong wrong WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG! This is the third or fourth time I have to say this: There is a cured status. There is diagnosis, then there is treatment, then there is remission for five years and then after that the patient is termed cured. Anything after that is survival rate and a number of cancers have been extensively researched that they have a high survivability rate. Breast cancers have a survival rate of 90% after the first five years and 80% for the years after that. Childhood leukemia has a survival rate of 90-95% (I am not researching the specific numbers because frankly I’m just ranting at this point). Colon cancer unfortunately has a survival rate of 15-20%. Cancers are all different depending on medicine’s knowledge of the actual cancer, the level of cancer and degree of metastatic cancer if it is a level IV cancer. This cure for cancer you speak of find is either a preventative drug or a quick fix rather than months of biweekly three hour chemo sessions followed by six weeks of daily radiation treatments at the ungodly hour of 7 in the morning while having to leave the house ass-earlier because rush hour traffic doubles the time of commute.
Don’t believe me fine, but I do like to learn facts. I am even more passionate about learning these facts because in year 2007 alone I had a high school friend diagnosed with thyroid cancer, an aunt diagnosed with colorectal cancer and my mom with breast cancer. Amazing how you know that other people have commented on this and yet don’t see that other people have also refuted those comments. Way to make me wake up angry…
For those interested…In another list I mentioned an article about a cancer drug with high success rates in dogs that they are going to try to apply to human treatment. This isn’t the same article but talks about the same thing.
http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20090323/miracle-dog-beats-aggressive-cancer
April 14th, 2009 at 4:42 am
haha…silly me. JFrater says childhood leukemia has a survival rate of 80% on this very list.
*fixing specifics of my rant.
Survival rate is included in diagnosis and treatment. For example, the 90% breast cancer refers to those undergoing treatments and remission and their likelihood of beating the cancer. The 80% after that refers to after that period, encompassing everything from possible recurrence of cancer to possible side effects of treatment (i.e. weakened immune system).
April 14th, 2009 at 10:44 am
*sigh* I really should stop CWAing (commenting while angry)…
“year 2007 alone I had a high school friend diagnosed with thyroid cancer, an aunt diagnosed with colorectal cancer and my mom with breast cancer.”
Correction:
*Starting with year 2007 (rather than that year alone). I know it’s nitpicky but… oh well…
April 14th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
gabi, I can’t agree with you more! My own husband is a survivor of not one, but two types of cancer! He’s been cancer-free, CURED, for 26 years.
Put *that* in your pipe and smoke it, Car-ell.
I have another very good friend who got cancer of the throat. He went through the surgery, chemo, radiation, and is today, 12 years later, cancer free. CURED.
Car-ell, around here, where people are likely to actually know what they’re talking about, it’s a real good idea to check your facts before presenting old-wives tales as gospel.
April 16th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
i want to know the who/what and where of the teething study…honestly that one is complete crap…i have raised three children all of which had fevers with teething. just because there is no scientific explanation as to why it occurs doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. there are plenty of things that occur in the human body that science can not explain or completely understand.
April 16th, 2009 at 10:21 pm
WOO! THREE kids?! Someone call the members and they can set up a world science meeting to let everyone know they are all idiots!
From NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/health/01real.html
Best layman’s summary of situation is there. There are also tests conducted in the University of Michigan as well as the George Washington University Medical Center. Yes, for some (maybe even for many) a low grade fever may occur during teething, but the gist of it is to not assume the fever is caused by the teething because it could (and most likely would) be a sign of something else. Teeth cut gums. Cut gums are open wounds. Open wounds are open doors for bacteria and viruses to enter. GWU’s studies are of particular interest because 84% of the teething infants with fevers were found to be infected with what that particular doctor calls the human teething virus. And I’m sure open wounds aren’t discriminatory – there’s a good likelihood any bacteria or virus that enters the child’s mouth can compromise the immune system.
If you wanted to know so badly, you could’ve done the research yourself…
April 16th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
I, too, had 3 children. None of my children had fevers while teething themselves, but all of them had fevers whilst the others teethed.
April 20th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
gabi319 i am quite aware of why a child has a fever when teething. and no i don’t need to do the research myself. i’m not the one posting a list claiming to have “busted a myth”. if you want to prove a point you need to provide some sort of evidence. and yes teething can cause a fever it may be indirect but it doesn’t change the fact that it is incorrect to say it is a myth. btw how many kids have you raised? i am a mother and a nurse and just because you didn’t like what i said does not mean i don’t know what i’m talking about so get a grip on ur bitchy self.
April 20th, 2009 at 7:49 pm
273. mrs.t
“i am a mother and a nurse”
Well thank you! I don’t recall asking for pointless credentials but I suppose I have no other choice but to say thank you. Should I ever be playing a trivia game and the question is “Who do you know who is a mother of three and a nurse?”, I will bypass the 40 or 50 family and friends in a similar situation and shout “mrs.t because she told me once in a comment board somewhere and I believe everything any anonymous commenter tells me!”
“i don’t need to do the research myself.
One would hope you do research and you continue to learn especially given that you are a nurse because to be honest, many doctors are so busy being doctors (paperwork, conferences, publishing cases, etc.) that it is often left to the nurses to take care of the practicing aspect of medical practice. One would hope that you’re as up-to-date with your knowledge as your peers and colleagues.
“get a grip on ur bitchy self.”
Aaannd there’s the ad hom. Rather than address the two case studies (with evidence as well as results supporting the original statement) I presented you, you went this route. Well, I can see why since it’s your only option…excluding keeping it classy and admit error or possibly coming back at me with peer-reviewed papers refuting my contributions.
‘i’m not the one posting a list claiming to have “busted a myth”’
Since I haven’t seen your name here before, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you may be new and therefore possibly haven’t published a list yourself. It requires quite a bit of research, cross-referencing, and limited wikipedia use because a number of us commentors are quite knowledgeable in a number of fields. In fact, Jfrater (the author of this list) not only owns this site but also publishes a bulk of the lists here and his research style far exceeds ‘commendable’. I’ve been itching for a chance to catch him unawares but he does his research well and I’d be more apt to believe him and his research of scientific studies than “i have raised three children all of which had fevers with teething”
Let’s sum this science-based, myth-busting rather neatly:
Myth: Stories passed down by word of mouth. Factual basis may be distorted or completely false
Myth-busting: providing factual data to prove a previous misconception is indeed false.
Myth in question: “Teething directly causes fevers.”
Nurse mrs.t in comment 273: “it may be indirect”
April 21st, 2009 at 10:22 am
wow…
quite a dressing down there, gabi.
April 21st, 2009 at 5:02 pm
Following my aforesaid “since my time on LV is drawing to a close”, I’ll add to gabi’s post…mrs. t. is not a nurse, nor is she a grown-up. Re-read her(?) post and compare it to any post whose author we know for a fact is who they claim to be. If “mrs. t” is a nurse and a mother, I am Elvis Presley.
The trollz are about and they are neither welcome nor funny.
April 21st, 2009 at 5:03 pm
cym, btw, you will never again, after the end of the week, have to worry about the wrath of segue.
April 21st, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Actually, there was a news story on a man who has a tree growing in his lung because he swallowed a seed:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,514955,00.html
April 21st, 2009 at 5:13 pm
Actually the tree growing inside you is true.
http://www.mosnews.com/weird/2009/04/13/firtree/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,514955,00.html
April 21st, 2009 at 5:32 pm
segue,
but that was our thing! How can I stroll through the corridors of LV in the same way knowing that two of our most knowledgable and influential regs have upped IP address and left us.
You can’t leave me with ONLY gabi and lo to tease. Randall’s ok but I never know when he is joking. As for Mark? Well…we have a thing going atm…
Think of what you’re doing! Could your conscience deal with it :p
Nah. Couldn’t keep it up!
If you are leaving our community for good, segue, I wish you all the luck in the world. It has been a pleasure debating you, and witnessing your wrath. May the trollz who have experienced it never recover!
Still. You could drop in and see us from time to time? I’m sure the creationism list will still be going strong; rambling from one tangent to another
April 21st, 2009 at 5:48 pm
280. cymraegbachgen87 : “…As for Mark? Well…we have a thing going atm…”
Carefully chosen words?
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:45 am
MarkL.
Maybe?
Am thinking of taking a break from LV myself. Getting bored fighting the same arguments with people over and over again (i.e the whole stizzy thing) I cannot comprehend why these people cannot see the truth.
Faith really is blind
BTW…someone is going to have to replace the wrath of segue…
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:56 pm
282. cymraegbachgen87 : “…Faith really is blind…”
Or maybe we are? That wasn’t a challenge, I don’t wanne be the next Stizzy – or casey for that matter
Don’t bother with them then. I know how much it takes out of you when you have to get on LV, then straight away reply to someone who JUST CAN’T SEE IT YOUR WAY! It is rather annoying. But Anon, then Gabi, now maybe even segue, then you… This place’ll be boring as all hell before too long
April 23rd, 2009 at 6:26 pm
segue
I’d be the worse kind of hypocrite to demand that you stay when I myself am not (a vow of silence/abstinence only you could break, dear segue! I am still subscribed to this list, which is how I learned of your possible LV-retirement)…what I do hope is that you don’t completely abandon Listverse. Quite along the lines of those cyclical Mayan calendars I write about far too frequently, comment boards always seem to have a cyclical pattern to them as well. A troll enters, writes some crap, troll leaves…new troll enters, writes some crap, troll leaves. That’s because they have no loyalties to anything other than themselves. What we regulars do have is a loyalty to Jfray and the Mod Squad for all the effort they put into this site, loyalty to the LV community – the TRUE community that engenders great conversations – and a loyalty to our LV friends. While things aren’t quite what they used to be (and my only regret is that I caught the tail end of that rather than arrive earlier to appreciate the full experience), I do hope that the trollz will once again grow bored and leave like the plague of locusts that they are. I hope you continue to check in every blue moon as will I and reenter the fray when you think the conversations show promise of spirited participation. Until then, take lots of pictures and make lots of crazy art! Happy trails to you, friend.
“BTW…someone is going to have to replace the wrath of segue…”
Cym, you could always take the helm. At every indignity, shout your battlecry: “The wrath of cymraegbachgen87 cometh!” Quite a mouthful (or type-ful) given how much wrath is needed right now, but well… you chose the name, you might as well flaunt it. J
“This place’ll be boring as all hell before too long”
Not boring, Mark. Simply different. Not necessarily a bad thing.
April 24th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
gabi
I am waffling. I didn’t expect to waffle, but I am. There are too many wonderful things about LV for me to just walk away, too many wonderful people. I have been here almost since the beginning, and it just feels like a part of me now.
Yes, there are things with which I am not happy, but nothing is perfect. What I need to do is pace myself. I have only so much energy, so much time. I have to portion it out more reasonably. More to photography, more to writing, more to gardening, more to my husband…what is left over to LV. Sounds doable.
Too, I didn’t expect people to ask me to stay. They did. I take that as a serious commitment, a type of vow. How can I say no?
So. I’ll be around. Not as much maybe, but here.
Rest assured, cym,TWOS lives on!
May 16th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Is it possible that kids associate excessive sugar with birthday parties, parties at school, Halloween etc? Times when they’re allowed to run around, be hyper and possibly allowed to stay up an extra hour or two. So when they have a few extra sodas after dinner on a normal night maybe they can’t sleep because of conditioning? Just thought I’d throw that out there.
May 24th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
I would like to offer an excerpt from Freedman and Barnouin’s “Skinny Bastard” to challenge the claims made in the item that made the number one spot “midnight snacks.”
From Chapter 12 of Skinny Bastard, pages 199 and 200…
“…if you eat too early in the morning you’ll be interrupting your body’s cleaning session. Remember, when your body isn’t working on food, it’s working on you! When your ‘cleaning crew’ is in the middle of cleanup and you start cramming food in, ‘they’ get overwhelmed. They stop what they’re doing, throw their hands up, scratch their heads, and finally decide that they just can’t deal with this mess you’re making. So they opt to store it away as fat and pretend they’ll get to it later. So when you wake up, you should wait to eat breakfast until you’re actually hungry. Don’t just eat right away because that’s what you’re used to…”
It seems to suggest to me that when the body is in repair mode it will take the incoming food and leave it to be processed as stored fat. If we eat right before sleep are we really giving our bodies the proper chance to repair without having to store the fat from our midnight snacks?
May 24th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
I would like to offer an excerpt from Freedman and Barnouin’s “Skinny Bastard” to challenge the claims made in the item that made the number one spot “midnight snacks.”
From Chapter 12 of Skinny Bastard, pages 199 and 200…
“…if you eat too early in the morning you’ll be interrupting your body’s cleaning session. Remember, when your body isn’t working on food, it’s working on you! When your ‘cleaning crew’ is in the middle of cleanup and you start cramming food in, ‘they’ get overwhelmed. They stop what they’re doing, throw their hands up, scratch their heads, and finally decide that they just can’t deal with this mess you’re making. So they opt to store it away as fat and pretend they’ll get to it later. So when you wake up, you should wait to eat breakfast until you’re actually hungry. Don’t just eat right away because that’s what you’re used to…”
It seems to suggest to me that when the body is in repair mode it will take the incoming food and leave it to be processed as stored fat. If we eat right before sleep are we really giving our bodies the proper chance to repair without having to store the fat from our midnight snacks?
May 25th, 2009 at 7:46 am
O dear. We have another fool reading inaccurate science and thinking the body does things at set times. A “repair mode”? dont make me laugh. If the body didnt repair constantly then you would die. Blood cells are constantly made and destroyed, so are skin cells, liver cells, the lining of your stomach. It suggests all this to you, sir, because you are poorly informed.
Marcello, please read my demolition of a post suggesting something similar above – around post number 237.
The body does things CONSTANTLY. Just because some fad diet book says the body does things differently, doesnt make it true.
That one paragraph is stuffed full of so much inaccurate science I am actually laughing at the fact you have taken it seriously. I mean, it is anthropormorphising the body. The body cannot make conscious decisions. It is run by negative and positive feedback loops, hormone levels and nervous signals. It does not DECIDE anything.
If the body got overwhelmed when it didnt have food for a few hours and then ‘decided’ (the body doesnt decide anything – it is not a conscious being) to store food as fat, it would store EVERY MEAL as fat.
“Remember, when your body isn’t working on food, it’s working on you”
O dear. This seems to suggest that we have only one type of mechanism in the body that is responsible for EVERYTHING. I don’t know what these things are meant to be “clearing up” but we have a myriad of enzymes for digestion, a different mechanism for absorption and a different one again for waste removal. Funnily enough, the body can take care of more than one process at a time. In fact in can do thousands at the same time.
Sorry friend, but your post is trash of the highest order. I suggest you get some education from REAL textbooks, not fad diet books.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:46 am
O dear. We have another fool reading inaccurate science and thinking the body does things at set times. A “repair mode”? dont make me laugh. If the body didnt repair constantly then you would die. Blood cells are constantly made and destroyed, so are skin cells, liver cells, the lining of your stomach. It suggests all this to you, sir, because you are poorly informed.
Marcello, please read my demolition of a post suggesting something similar above – around post number 237.
The body does things CONSTANTLY. Just because some fad diet book says the body does things differently, doesnt make it true.
That one paragraph is stuffed full of so much inaccurate science I am actually laughing at the fact you have taken it seriously. I mean, it is anthropormorphising the body. The body cannot make conscious decisions. It is run by negative and positive feedback loops, hormone levels and nervous signals. It does not DECIDE anything.
If the body got overwhelmed when it didnt have food for a few hours and then ‘decided’ (the body doesnt decide anything – it is not a conscious being) to store food as fat, it would store EVERY MEAL as fat.
“Remember, when your body isn’t working on food, it’s working on you”
O dear. This seems to suggest that we have only one type of mechanism in the body that is responsible for EVERYTHING. I don’t know what these things are meant to be “clearing up” but we have a myriad of enzymes for digestion, a different mechanism for absorption and a different one again for waste removal. Funnily enough, the body can take care of more than one process at a time. In fact in can do thousands at the same time.
Sorry friend, but your post is trash of the highest order. I suggest you get some education from REAL textbooks, not fad diet books.
May 25th, 2009 at 9:53 am
287. Marcello:
Here’s a quote from the biographies of these two authors:
“Rory Freedman, a former agent for Ford Models, has studied diet, health, traditional, and holistic nutrition for more than ten years. Kim Barnouin is a former model who holds a Masters of Science degree in Holistic Nutrition”.
That should tell you off the bat that perhaps you shouldn’t take everything they say without question. Ms. Freedman has ‘studied’ this for ten years but there is no mention of certification to be a nutritionist. When googling this Masters degree in Holistic Nutrition, I only came up with the Clayton College of Natural Medicine. Not to knock on this school but from what I’ve seen on google, this is the ONLY place that offers this, which to me speaks volumes about the credibility of this degree. Holistic nutrition may or may not help but until it is tested repeatedly and found to be sound AND SAFE information, I’m going to be skeptical. To be honest, when trying to write a biography about oneself after publishing information on nutritional advice, I’d start off listing the credentials regarding nutritional expertise FIRST rather than “former model”.
Your claims challenged…and were found lacking. I do recommend you read cymraegbachgen’s 237. There’s no fancy speak of ‘cleaning men who throw up their hands in frustrated manner’ but I think you may find it to be an enlightening read.
And for future reference regarding fad diet books… most of them are rubbish. At the very least background check the author to see if it’s even worth looking at the book covers before believing the crap they put in between.
May 25th, 2009 at 9:53 am
287. Marcello:
Here’s a quote from the biographies of these two authors:
“Rory Freedman, a former agent for Ford Models, has studied diet, health, traditional, and holistic nutrition for more than ten years. Kim Barnouin is a former model who holds a Masters of Science degree in Holistic Nutrition”.
That should tell you off the bat that perhaps you shouldn’t take everything they say without question. Ms. Freedman has ‘studied’ this for ten years but there is no mention of certification to be a nutritionist. When googling this Masters degree in Holistic Nutrition, I only came up with the Clayton College of Natural Medicine. Not to knock on this school but from what I’ve seen on google, this is the ONLY place that offers this, which to me speaks volumes about the credibility of this degree. Holistic nutrition may or may not help but until it is tested repeatedly and found to be sound AND SAFE information, I’m going to be skeptical. To be honest, when trying to write a biography about oneself after publishing information on nutritional advice, I’d start off listing the credentials regarding nutritional expertise FIRST rather than “former model”.
Your claims challenged…and were found lacking. I do recommend you read cymraegbachgen’s 237. There’s no fancy speak of ‘cleaning men who throw up their hands in frustrated manner’ but I think you may find it to be an enlightening read.
And for future reference regarding fad diet books… most of them are rubbish. At the very least background check the author to see if it’s even worth looking at the book covers before believing the crap they put in between.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Well said gabi. As far as I know, you do not need ANY qualifications to call yourself a nutritionist…this accounts for the reams of crap that manage to stuff bookshelves under the “Diet” section!
I doubt this person will check in but I hope they do…and they come a little better enlightened next time.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:27 am
Well said gabi. As far as I know, you do not need ANY qualifications to call yourself a nutritionist…this accounts for the reams of crap that manage to stuff bookshelves under the “Diet” section!
I doubt this person will check in but I hope they do…and they come a little better enlightened next time.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:58 am
You don’t need qualifications to write a book on nutrition but certainly have a business and a job dishing out medically sound advice regarding nutrition! I’ve a few friends who’ve gotten degrees in nutrition and/or food chemistry. So as far as being a legitimate, practicing nutritionist at a hospital or nursing home, certification is needed but considering how it seems that 99% of the general population falls for these false claims that eating only purple foods will make you skinny (which technically, it will. Skinny AND MALNOURISHED!), every uncertified Tom, Dick, and Rory Freedman is pretending to know what they’re talking about in book form!
Plus, nowadays, the term “Holistic” makes people automatically assume that it’s legit regardless of lack of study, which drives me crazy. I could attach anything to “holistic” and people would think I’m some kind of guru. Henceforth, I will be known as a Holistically Aggressive Driver! Holistic Plant Waterer? Holistic Telemarketer? Perhaps Amy and Marcello won’t return but for you future ‘The liver repairs itself from 2:13 am to 2:47 am on a full moon that falls on a Wednesday night’ …can you read those job title examples I gave and see how ridiculous that sounds? Why does ‘Holistic Nutritionist’ sound any better?! Until the academic community can determine what is true and what is false in this huge field of Holistic Medicine and it is widely accepted as a legitimate form of treatment, it’s still rubbish.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:58 am
You don’t need qualifications to write a book on nutrition but certainly have a business and a job dishing out medically sound advice regarding nutrition! I’ve a few friends who’ve gotten degrees in nutrition and/or food chemistry. So as far as being a legitimate, practicing nutritionist at a hospital or nursing home, certification is needed but considering how it seems that 99% of the general population falls for these false claims that eating only purple foods will make you skinny (which technically, it will. Skinny AND MALNOURISHED!), every uncertified Tom, Dick, and Rory Freedman is pretending to know what they’re talking about in book form!
Plus, nowadays, the term “Holistic” makes people automatically assume that it’s legit regardless of lack of study, which drives me crazy. I could attach anything to “holistic” and people would think I’m some kind of guru. Henceforth, I will be known as a Holistically Aggressive Driver! Holistic Plant Waterer? Holistic Telemarketer? Perhaps Amy and Marcello won’t return but for you future ‘The liver repairs itself from 2:13 am to 2:47 am on a full moon that falls on a Wednesday night’ …can you read those job title examples I gave and see how ridiculous that sounds? Why does ‘Holistic Nutritionist’ sound any better?! Until the academic community can determine what is true and what is false in this huge field of Holistic Medicine and it is widely accepted as a legitimate form of treatment, it’s still rubbish.
May 31st, 2009 at 8:00 am
While I agree with most of that, the holistic approach to medicine that treats the patient as more than just a collection of symptoms, and treats the mind as well as the body, is an appealling philosophy. Problems come up, however, when the symptoms take a back seat and holistic practitioners start to use alternative therapies on conditions that have been shown to respond positively to traditional therapy.
My own particular distaste atm is with homeopathy – what a load of trash that is!
May 31st, 2009 at 8:02 am
What is with all the duplicated comments?
May 31st, 2009 at 7:37 pm
“My own particular distaste atm is with homeopathy”
Mine would be light therapy. It’s been proven effective against Seasonal Affective Disorder but not much else. However, they’d have you believing that light shone on the backs of your knees will cure you of insomnia and pulsing lights can cure everything from Attention Deficit Disorder to TMJ. I read an article about a woman who insists this is curing her grandson of his cancer. The boy only gets to leave his tanning-bed-looking contraption to pee and that’s about it.
May 31st, 2009 at 7:42 pm
299. Gabi,
Hadn’t heard of that one before! But it seems to conform to the usual alternative therapy bumkum. Homeopathy works on the premise that like cures like, and uses dilutions that means the end product does not containt even a single molecule of the original concentration which apparantly works to treat the specific ailment
May 31st, 2009 at 7:42 pm
Woo. 300!
May 31st, 2009 at 7:56 pm
“Woo. 300!”
What’re you cheering about? It’s one zero short.
hahahaha…
Found out about the ‘knee-light to insomnia’ thing when it was recommended to me, believe it or not. Dealing with little insomnia for a couple years now and this was brought up. Even though I was immediately skeptical, I still looked it up and found the other nonsense it supposedly cures. What I find really dangerous about this is that it’s so easy. Buy a bulb. Go outdoors. It’s far too easy for someone to not only self-diagnose but also self-medicate even though this isn’t a regulated or monitored practice so there’s no way to know just how much damage is being done that could’ve have been fixed if addressed early enough.
May 31st, 2009 at 8:14 pm
297 cym: Couldn’t agree more. My doctor put my symptoms of diverticulitis on the back burner and tried some weird voodoo crap….that didn’t work at all! In fact I got worse. If I have a blow out…I have to have one of those bags attached to me for the rest of my life. I tried a new doctor and got the treatment I needed. Sucks when you have change a doctor but it’s better to be informed about your own issues more so than a doctor to spot the incorrectness they might float your way.
302 gabi319: He has done that one 2 previous lists, too. It’s called 3000 envy!
May 31st, 2009 at 8:22 pm
If we deleted the duplicate comments, *I* would have the 300!!
May 31st, 2009 at 8:32 pm
Good one, gabi!
cym…had to share this. I took a quiz on Facebook to find out my Welsh name…it is: Blodwen Rowley
May 31st, 2009 at 10:07 pm
gabi MUST you take THIS away from me too!?
May 31st, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Welsh meaning flower I think. Although it has a different connotation in Wales, similar to the name myfanwy (pronounced muh-van-wee) which is difficult to explain to non welsh people.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:17 pm
I have problems with many replies to these theories on this list…
August 9th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
Intersting list , some references might be good to soothe the naysayers.
August 11th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Health can be easy if you know how. Here are some spiritual healing techniques
http://www.alternative-spiritual-healing.com/
August 20th, 2009 at 10:56 pm
Chemotherapy is painful… It kills your immune system (temporarily) so that it can get to the cancer cells. I myself had chemotherapy (I survived Hodgkin’s Lymphoma), and having no immune system is the most painful thing. It feels like hell opened on your body. Ugh.
August 20th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
@ Gabi319, ACTUALLY, there really is no “cured” stage after cancer. The dead cells are always there. When a person gets a PET scan after being declared “in remission”, the dead cells will always show. But when a cancer cell dies, it becomes scar tissue, that’s why it seems like a cancer survior is cured.
August 22nd, 2009 at 3:34 pm
I would have to disagree with your assment of the loss of body heat through the head although only 10% of your heat is lost through the head, the head is less than 10% of the average proportioned person. Also it has less surface area than say your legs which take considerably more space than the head. That is why feel colder without trousers than without a hat. Because you are, your legs have much greater area of skin from which to loose heat on. One of the reasons why we loose so much heat from are head is the sheer amount of blood there almost 20% ( I think it’s 20%) of blood is used by the brain. Blood looses heat fast, this is why when we are suffering heat stroke we go red as the blood rises to the surface with so much blood it would be impossible for the head not to loose a large amount of heat proportionally.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:51 am
@segue (185):
For a “long time member” you sure whine like a noob, how bout you deflate your ego a bit and just shut up. Do you really think people care if you have been a member of a particular site for xx years ??? Hell no, this is cyberspace: Grow some huevos or just unplug your internet connection.
August 28th, 2009 at 12:55 am
@gabi319 (304):
You must be fat and ugly to post so many comments, Im so tired of reading them. Change your nick to Gabby since that suits you more. Gabi No Life Rides again… Ooooh baby, can I date you, you are sOOOO HOT with your 3000 posts. God Im so turned on to reply to an actual 3000 club member.
Please call me.
September 15th, 2009 at 9:07 am
Sorry but it is wrong your fourth myth, I am strongly disagree with it,
September 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 am
have you ever heard that if you hit your breasts you’ll get breast cancer?
October 1st, 2009 at 3:07 pm
According to a recent study nr. 1 is actually correct. I read a article about it on BBC recently.
October 29th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
It’s not the sugar, it’s the caffeine in #1. And hummingbirds have to intake carbohydrates over protein because of their very small weight.
November 23rd, 2009 at 9:37 pm
As a long time powerlifter and self proclamined expert in weight training I would have to disagree about the claim of eating before you goto bed. Your body burns calories at a faster rate when awake and then even quicker when your muscles are pumped with more oxygen and blood. If you eat right before you goto bed the calories you consume with metabolize at a much slower rate and turn into stored fat more quickly. I’m quite surprised you guys didn’t do some basic research on that one. It makes me concerned about the accuracy of the previous claims.
January 11th, 2010 at 12:33 pm
Number 8 is a total eye opener, for me! Glad to know…
January 13th, 2010 at 3:09 am
Jake, I am a qualified strength and conditioning coach and I can assure you that it doesn’t matter when you eat, it all has the same effect. When you eat carbohydrates they are either burned or stored as glycogen. The muscles store about 100 grams of it and the liver stores about 500 grams. Any left over gets stored as fat. Even though you burn more calories while awake it makes no difference. How could it? Your activity level is the same throughout 24 hours. The calories don’t get locked away unable to be burned just because they were eaten at bed time.
Also, I noticed a lot of people not agreeing with number 10. I’m a father and I do a lot of research on the human body. These things combined have led to many discoveries. I have read much research supporting number 10. Sugar does not increase brain activity by any large amount. The brain is regulated in terms of how much energy amd blood flow it receives. It will not receive any more or any less based on consumption of more of a particular nutrient. Increased brain activity is the only thing that could cause hyperactivity. Since increased sugar doesn’t make this happen then the whole claim about sugar and hyper kids is a myth. It’s not necessarily the changes in behaviour you’re imagining, it’s more the expectant result. There are so many variables such as your own subtle communication patterns and certain psychological triggers in the child.