domain:vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com
Tenaz
7m ago
I think it's a combination of 4 and 5.
- Survivorship bias applies not only to reporting, but to continuing with the diet at all. If you give up then you're not going to report that it didn't work.
- Simply watching one's weight is often enough to lose weight due to correlation if not causation. Those who press forward and continue to watch their weight and follow any diet are likely making other lifestyle changes too.
- A 2 hour window where you eat very little is probably a big improvement on its own for most people. You need to plan out your meals much better and cannot mindlessly snack (you at least need to check you're not within the window first).
Only downside is wasting time and effort and (as with EY) potentially convincing yourself that dieting doesn't work.
I think it's worth trying, but improving physical health is really a lifelong goal. These gimmick diets might work for losing the initial weight, but you need to be willing to keep the diet up forever or learn the fundamental skills involved if you don't want the weight to come right back.
Skibboleth
11m ago
Until said reversal actually manifests, calling its absence an artifact seems premature. Predicting the Democrats are going to become the party of rich white people is one thing (which I still find doubtful, but nevertheless). Saying the Democrats are already the party of old rich white people is factually inaccurate when the GOP has a distinct advantage with high income voters (10 points), white voters (10-15 points), and older voters (~5 points, higher when talking about really old voters).
Amongst the posh, Democrats are so utterly dominant its comical.
This seems to hinge on gerrymandering 'elite' (and related terms) in ways that include a lot of middle income people from major cities while excluding high income people from the suburbs and major cities. The regional gentry that dominate the Republican Party don't like to think of themselves as 'elite', even though they often make more money (in many cases, significantly more money) than the urban professional class that mirrors them in the Democratic Party.
Like, I'm not really sure what you mean by posh here, since that's a British term without clear American analogy (maybe some New England Old Money, but they're frankly not very relevant). I'm guessing you mean affluent metropolitan professionals, but that's just a guess. Or maybe Ivy League students, but then you're not really comparing SES, you're comparing children to parents.
I can't find it on Google (because of course I can't) but someone looked at political donations from every large employer.
Assuming this is true, it is evidence for the merchant/gentry class vs professional class divide. It's not evidence for Republicans being poorer or more working class.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
12m ago
100ProofTollBooth
12m ago
Then forget about learning how to do the job before you do it. You won't, and you might bring in some preconceived notions that actually hinder you.
- Work Hard
- Be willing to fail and then learn
- Ask for help
- Talk to people. Cold outreach e-mails work
- Understand you're going on probably the most difficult emotional journey of your life aside from a big relationship thing (wedding, divorce) or other family relevant stuff (birth of children)
100ProofTollBooth
14m ago
- Simply watching one's weight is sufficient to lose weight
- Survivorship bias: only the people who lost weight report it
Pretty much these two things. Most diets fail because the diet-er just stops.
quiet_NaN
14m ago
Originally I picked uniforms kind of at random, but thinking more about it, it seems like a fun hill to die on.
Uniforms have been part of most armies for centuries. Kind of weird as a fashion choice? I think that the reason is that uniforms serve a useful purpose in the military: they erase differences in class and culture between the troops, and emphasize the difference between the troops and the enemy or civilians. This increases group cohesion: instead of seeing Bob the bully lying bleeding in the barbed wires in their stupid blue sweater, you see a fellow brother in arms. This unit cohesion and the sublimation of individual responsibility to the chain of command are then useful for military operations such as winning a battle or murdering a village.
"beliefs they are fighting for the oppressed" and "wears uniforms" are both Bayesian evidence for someone being more likely to drag you from your home and murdering you. Of course, there are some important difference in details between the postmen and the Einsatzgruppen, but there are also some important differences in details between the Stalinists and campus protesters.
100ProofTollBooth
15m ago
the Pope's rather unusual looking sculpture
Holy Fuck that's fucking metal as shit. Fuckin' Deus Vult, Bro.
As a tradcath (perhaps I need to downgrade myself to aspiring tradcath, thanks, @hydroacetylene) it's important to me that people realize the deep history of badassery present in religious art.
The 1970s Peter-Paul-and-Mary-ization of American Churches and hymns really did far too much to turn the aesthetics fake and gay.
CertainlyWorse
Dedicated Pessimist
19m ago
Don't have a Code of Conduct. Tear out anyone suggesting a Code of Conduct root and stem.
jeroboam
22m ago
Re: your fact about major corp's donations; It was the NYPD and ... The United States Marine Corps. God Bless the Alcoholic Gun Cult.
It's crazy how total the left's demand for control is. They will not rest until they control literally every institution.
They already have the universities, nearly all major corporations, the media, the bureaucracy, the non-profit sector, the rich, the technology sector, and the legal system (minus the Supreme Court). But we are assured that just a single election could usher in a right-wing fascist dictatorship. It's delusional.
practical_romantic
24m ago
I have zero previous experience lol
Tomato
25m ago
No one has an obligation to sell you their home just because it would improve your commute and they're not commuting any more.
They have made it illegal for their neighbors to use their land how they want to use it (e.g., build higher density apartment buildings). Nobody is forcing granny to sell her home; granny is preventing other people from doing things with their own land. That's a real economic harm.
100ProofTollBooth
27m ago
[1]: If you are into cryptocurrency, watch the episode of Alexi Friedman with the founder of Cardano on it. He talks for like 6 hours and says NOTHING. This is a good example of what a 2024 motte poster does in most top level posts.
My favorite part of that interview was him repeatedly saying "normies are too dumb to understand crypto so we can't let them use it. Also, it's very important that everyone uses crypto." He should'e had his wife's boyfriend review his notes.
Tomato
27m ago
There are plenty of people who want to sell, the problem is that their neighbors have made it illegal to build higher density on their own land.
jeroboam
28m ago
What do you think causes people on the Shangri-La diet to lose weight? I'll present a few possibilities.
- The mechanism explained in the Less Wrong article is correct
- Something else we don't understand
- No one actually loses weight, they are lying
- Simply watching one's weight is sufficient to lose weight
- Survivorship bias: only the people who lost weight report it
In any case, there don't seem to be any downsides and the anecdotal evidence is strong. I don't need a causal mechanism as long as it's safe which this diet obviously is.
jeroboam
31m ago
That seems like the obvious answer.
Personally, activity levels have no bearing on my weight. I just got back from California where I walked 10 miles per day on average. I gained weight. Eating 4,000 calories in a day is just so easy and enjoyable for me. I'd say I'm 90th percentile in activity and my resting heart rate is in the 40s. Still kinda fat, though. I gain weight whenever I'm not actively dieting.
I do think there is an activity level that is sufficient for weight loss, but it's extremely high. When I was young, I was probably 99th percentile in activity and was quite skinny.
SSCReader
32m ago
It can be true that you don't have an obligation to do so AND that socially that does result in additional costs on productive people. You don't have an obligation to drive a less polluting vehicle, nonetheless the government can force you to do so (or tax you if you drive a more polluting one) if it thinks the benefit is great enough. Companies don't have an obligation to keep manufacturing in America as it is more expensive but it might be a good idea to force/tax them to do so anyway etc. etc.
Not having a personal obligation doesn't negate the fact your choices may be sup-optimal for society at large in other words.
100ProofTollBooth
33m ago
Trump won the >$100k/yr vote in 2020* and his electoral coalition was significantly whiter and older than Biden's.
I believe you are incorrect. [This Nate Silver article] specifically says it went the other way. More importantly, and to @jeroboam 's point ... the realignment is still happening.
@jeroboam - Re: your fact about major corp's donations; It was the NYPD and ... The United States Marine Corps. God Bless the Alcoholic Gun Cult.
Whatever you guys might claim to be, this seems to be a place where it's ok to call an immigrant group an infestation but not to say that the antebellum south was an execrable culture.
You have either fundamentally misunderstood or are fundamentally misrepresenting the thread you linked. You are in fact allowed to say that the antebellum south was an execrable culture, and many people have said here it many times before. You can in fact argue that Confederate statues should be torn down, and you can even argue that people who think otherwise are bad; many people have argued that here many times before. You do in fact have to be careful about how you talk about any group here, and quite a few anti-woke people have in fact been banned for failing to do so properly. The objection in that thread, as described to you repeatedly at the time, was that you were conflating people to object to the destruction of Confederate memorials with slave owners.
I think the antebellum south was an execrable culture, and holding the history constant to the start of the Civil War, I prefer our actual history where their society was destroyed through mass violence to counterfactuals where it might have been allowed to fade away peacefully, continuing to perpetrate evil throughout its decline. Further, I think that destroying Confederate monuments is both stupid and evil here and now. I'd be happy to discuss either opinion with you as time permits, as either side of either opinion fit comfortably within the rules here.
CertainlyWorse
Dedicated Pessimist
39m ago
You can see the awkward 'Ok ACTION, please start walking now' moment in some of the shots.
ChickenOverlord
39m ago
I love to shit on the Bay Area as much as the next rightwinger, but its nightlife is nowhere near as dead as Seattle's.
100ProofTollBooth
43m ago
I feel like @FiveHourMarathon might have worthwhile input here.
He is of a noble lift-bro tribe that my elders (Mark Rippetoe) have told legends of.
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
44m ago
I have no suggestions, but just want to wish you good luck.
100ProofTollBooth
44m ago
breaks the association
This isn't how your - or anyone's - body works.
Here's all of dieting summed up:
- Processed foods and sugar are the devil. You have to stop eating them completely. There is no other way.
- Put protein at the center of your diet. Every full meal you eat should contain a non-trivial amount of protein. Protein is meat, poultry, pork, eggs, and dairy. You can supplement (but not replace) with protein powders.
- Figure out if you are fat or carb sensitive. Most people just retain a lot more of one or the other. You do this by keeping track of what you're eating day-to-day, nothing how you feel (lethargic, tired, etc.), and then weighing yourself.
- Like sleep, regularity is important. Eat at the same times as much as possible (this is hard when traveling, I understand that). Snacks can be snacks in that they're smaller meals. They can't be absent minded. Plan your snacks.
- Hydrate
Definitely could have had some better word choice there. "filled" seems to replace "infested" just fine.
More options
Context Copy link