Biomedical Scientist Answers New Pseudoscience Questions

[Thought Art]

Definitely helped me change some of my views when I contemplate the things she says with ChatGPT consensus. 

[integral]

Got to be careful with these kind of echo Chambers. She's repeating the status quo, it's important as a foundation to learn this stuff especially if you don't have a biology or Science or nutrition background. 

After a foundation is built you need to then completely throw it out the window, and examine everything very very carefully from scratch.

Assume to know nothing about anything and then carefully experiment and verify everything for yourself. Some stuff it's not possible to verify or really to make any sense of, so you have to go with your best judgment.

I don't have time to watch the whole video: at some point she talks about how aluminum in deodorant doesn't cause cancer. And the problem with this is cancer is not why you should avoid it. The problem with all of this science is that they're not trying to maximize Health there trying to avoid diseases. This is a massive blind spot. You should absolutely avoid garbage deodorants because it f**** up your hormones. Are you seriously going to trust some random for-profit company with anything associated with your body? Deodorants are made with the cheapest possible manufactured substances And sold at the highest possible price. And all of it is absorbed directly into your blood through your skin. The skin absorbs and consumes everything it comes into contact with.

Edited January 14 by integral

[integral]

I watch some more and then she goes on and explains how Plastics don't accumulate in the body. When Brian Johnson just did an episode where he tested it and sais his testicles are filled with plastic. 🤷‍♀️

[Thought Art]

Tomorrow I’m going to make some posts exploring her critique on Alkaline water and mainly the alkaline diet.
 

I want to question whether it is coming from a higher or lower perspective. 

- Explore her relative authority vs mine. If I am going to come at this from a higher perspective I have to be humble and recognize I am not an expert in this field. 

- Explore how I have access to AI and Google and can fact check not only her claims but her scope and depth of her claims, and any nuances or contested points she makes, and whether or not she is strawmanning some of the ideas. 
 

- I want to look at various studies conclusions and chat with ChatGPT regard her claims, contrasted with a steel man version of Alkaline diet and what it is actually claiming to do for the body. How do most of western world eat? Is it lots of processed acidic foods? Of course not all acidic foods and processed. Nuance is required here and I explored this earlier with the ai. 
 

I was just on a walk exploring this concept with Chagpt and I think she misses a lot of the points made by the alkaline diet, in its western inception historically than she gives credit for. She essentially straw man’s it for saying the goal is to change the ph of the body including the blood, which would be lethal. Which is true, but based on my inquiry with ChatGPT is not a truthful representation of the alkaline diets goal or health claim. 
 

 

Edited January 14 by Thought Art

[Thought Art]

@integral Good points. This could be a fun contemplation exercise with AI. I want to go through her points with AI and find holes in her points. 
 

Another one is that she may over generalize that Sauna has no evidence of detoxification which is actually does with heavy metals. Again, this is a tricky area and studies can be flawed. 

[Thought Art]

here is a snippet of my current convo:

My Input: 

Yes, but this is in contrast to a highly acidic and generally unhealthy diet. List the common American diet, and then list the type of foods suggested by alkaline diet. Then, compare them both more generally through the lens of holistic health and meta data

 

 

ChatGPT;

Here’s a detailed breakdown comparing the common American diet and the alkaline diet, followed by a holistic analysis of their impacts on health and supported by general meta-data on nutrition and wellness.

 

The Common American Diet (Standard American Diet - SAD)

 

This diet is often high in:

    1.    Processed and Packaged Foods:

    •    Refined grains: White bread, pasta, and rice.

    •    Sugary snacks: Candy, cookies, cakes.

    •    Fast food: Burgers, fries, pizza.

    2.    Animal Products:

    •    High-fat meats: Bacon, sausage, beef.

    •    Dairy: Cheese, cream, ice cream.

    3.    Beverages:

    •    Sugary drinks: Soda, energy drinks, and sweetened juices.

    •    Coffee and alcohol in excess.

    4.    Added Sugars and Fats:

    •    Artificial sweeteners, high-fructose corn syrup.

    •    Trans fats and refined vegetable oils (e.g., corn oil, soybean oil).

 

Nutritional Profile:

    •    Low in fiber.

    •    High in saturated fats, sodium, refined sugar, and calories.

    •    Low in essential nutrients like vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants.

 

The Alkaline Diet

 

This diet emphasizes:

    1.    Fruits and Vegetables:

    •    Leafy greens: Spinach, kale, broccoli.

    •    Alkaline fruits: Avocado, citrus (despite acidity, they have alkaline effects post-digestion), berries.

    2.    Whole Foods and Legumes:

    •    Quinoa, lentils, chickpeas.

    3.    Nuts and Seeds:

    •    Almonds, chia seeds, flaxseeds.

    4.    Hydrating Beverages:

    •    Herbal teas, alkaline water, green smoothies.

    5.    Minimized Animal Products:

    •    Often excludes or limits meat, dairy, and processed foods.

    6.    Healthy Fats:

    •    Coconut oil, olive oil, avocado oil.

 

Nutritional Profile:

    •    High in fiber, vitamins, minerals (e.g., magnesium, potassium), and antioxidants.

    •    Low in sodium, refined sugar, and saturated fats.

    •    Promotes whole, nutrient-dense, and anti-inflammatory foods.

 

Comparison Through Holistic Health

 

Here’s a side-by-side analysis across various health dimensions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meta-Data on Health Impacts

 

1. The American Diet:

    •    Obesity and Chronic Diseases:

    •    42% of Americans are obese, linked to a high-calorie, nutrient-poor diet (CDC, 2023).

    •    Increased rates of Type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and heart disease.

    •    Gut Microbiome:

    •    Refined sugars and low fiber intake negatively affect gut health.

    •    Life Expectancy:

    •    Poor diet contributes to a rise in preventable, diet-related diseases.

 

2. The Alkaline Diet:

    •    Bone Health:

    •    Higher intake of fruits and vegetables is associated with better bone density (Journal of Nutrition, 2021).

    •    Inflammation:

    •    Anti-inflammatory foods like leafy greens and berries reduce markers of systemic inflammation (Frontiers in Nutrition, 2022).

    •    Disease Prevention:

    •    Plant-rich diets lower risks of cardiovascular disease, Type 2 diabetes, and some cancers (American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2020).

    •    Longevity:

    •    Diets high in whole, plant-based foods are linked to longer life expectancy and better quality of life (Blue Zones study, 2020).

 

Holistic Health Takeaways

    1.    Nutrient Density: The alkaline diet offers a higher density of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants, whereas the American diet often leads to “hidden hunger” (calories without nutrients).

    2.    Inflammation and Stress: The SAD promotes inflammation and metabolic stress, while the alkaline diet provides tools to combat both through anti-inflammatory foods.

    3.    Prevention Over Cure: An alkaline-inspired diet aligns with preventative medicine, reducing the risks of chronic diseases.

 

Conclusion

 

The alkaline diet doesn’t just stand as an alternative to the Standard American Diet—it is a counterpoint that highlights how far the SAD has diverged from holistic and nutritional wellness. While some claims about the alkaline diet (like changing blood pH) are scientifically unsupported, its principles of emphasizing whole, plant-based foods provide tangible benefits for long-term health and vitality.

Edited January 14 by Thought Art

[Thought Art]

The important question here with relation to her mis characterization of the alkaline diet: 

 

Does the alkaline diet claim to change blood ph?

ChatGPT:

The alkaline diet itself, when correctly understood, does not claim to change blood pH directly. However, this is a common misconception surrounding the diet, partly because of the way it has been marketed or misunderstood by some proponents. Let’s clarify:

 

What the Alkaline Diet Claims

 

The alkaline diet suggests that eating more alkaline-forming foods (like fruits, vegetables, nuts, and seeds) and fewer acid-forming foods (like meat, dairy, and processed foods) helps the body maintain balance and supports overall health.

 

The claim is not that it directly changes blood pH but that it:

    1.    Reduces the acid load on the body.

    2.    Supports natural buffering systems (like the bicarbonate buffer system).

    3.    Encourages an overall healthier internal environment (e.g., better hydration, nutrient absorption, reduced inflammation).

 

Why Blood pH Doesn’t Change

 

The body regulates blood pH very tightly between 7.35 and 7.45 because even slight deviations can be life-threatening. This regulation happens through:

    •    Kidney function: Excreting excess acids or bases in urine.

    •    Respiratory system: Regulating carbon dioxide levels through breathing.

    •    Buffer systems: Neutralizing pH fluctuations, like the bicarbonate buffer.

 

Dietary intake has minimal direct impact on blood pH because of these robust homeostatic systems. For example:

    •    If you eat acidic foods, the kidneys excrete more acidic compounds in the urine.

    •    If you eat alkaline foods, the kidneys excrete more alkaline compounds in the urine.

 

Result: Urine pH can fluctuate, but blood pH remains stable.

 

Common Misunderstandings

 

Some people mistakenly interpret the diet as claiming to alkalize the blood, which is not accurate. This misunderstanding may arise from:

    1.    Over-simplified marketing that uses “alkalize your body” as a tagline.

    2.    Confusion between blood pH and localized changes in urine pH or cellular environment.

 

What the Diet Does Impact

 

While blood pH doesn’t change, the alkaline diet can:

    1.    Provide more alkaline-forming minerals (e.g., calcium, magnesium, potassium), which can:

    •    Support bone health by reducing calcium leaching from bones.

    •    Ease the burden on the kidneys in neutralizing dietary acids.

    2.    Influence urine pH, which reflects how the body is excreting excess acids or bases.

    3.    Reduce inflammation, improve digestion, and support overall health by emphasizing nutrient-dense, whole foods.

 

Conclusion

 

The alkaline diet, when understood correctly, does not claim to change blood pH. Instead, it aims to support the body’s natural regulatory systems and overall health by reducing dietary acid load and emphasizing nutrient-dense, alkaline-forming foods. The focus is more on creating an internal environment that promotes vitality and reduces the strain on the body’s buffering mechanisms.

 

[Thought Art]

@integral Review her response to does sugar cause cancer! Is she strawmanning? 
 

I think what she is saying isn’t directly wrong, but lacks nuance surrounding this inquiring and the meaning behind the question more generally: 

chatgpt:

Yes, there is evidence suggesting a link between high sugar intake and an increased risk of certain cancers. While sugar itself doesn’t directly cause cancer, excessive consumption can lead to conditions that elevate cancer risk. Here’s how:

 

1. Obesity and Metabolic Syndrome:

    •    Weight Gain: High sugar intake contributes to obesity, a well-established risk factor for various cancers, including breast, colorectal, and pancreatic cancers.

    •    Metabolic Disturbances: Excessive sugar can lead to insulin resistance and chronic inflammation, both of which are associated with increased cancer risk.

 

2. Sugar-Sweetened Beverages (SSBs):

    •    Cancer Risk: Studies have found that higher consumption of SSBs is associated with an increased risk of certain cancers. For instance, a meta-analysis indicated that each 250 mL/day increment of SSB consumption was associated with a 17% higher risk of coronary heart disease and a 4% higher risk of all-cause mortality.

 

3. Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs):

    •    Colorectal Cancer: Recent research suggests that diets high in UPFs, which often contain added sugars, are linked to an increased risk of colorectal cancer. These foods can cause harmful inflammation and suppress the immune system, creating an environment conducive to cancer development.

 

4. Biological Mechanisms:

    •    Insulin and IGF-1 Levels: High sugar intake can elevate insulin and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels, promoting cell proliferation and inhibiting apoptosis, processes that can contribute to cancer development.

 

Conclusion:

While sugar doesn’t directly cause cancer, excessive intake is linked to obesity, metabolic disturbances, and increased cancer risk. Limiting added sugars, particularly from sugar-sweetened beverages and ultra-processed foods, is advisable for overall health and cancer prevention.

Edited January 14 by Thought Art

[Thought Art]

Look at her explaination behind the pseuodoscience of cancer: starving cancer cells in a Petry dish. 
 

This woman claims she works in cancer research. lol. 
 

But, then run it through ChatGPT and get a far more nuanced explanation. 
 

The reality is more nuanced: 

 

ChatGPT:

 

Fasting, particularly in the form of intermittent fasting or short-term fasting, has garnered attention for its potential role in cancer treatment. Research suggests that fasting may enhance the effectiveness of conventional cancer therapies and improve patient outcomes. Here’s an overview of the current understanding:

 

1. Enhanced Treatment Efficacy:

    •    Chemotherapy Sensitization: Studies indicate that fasting can make cancer cells more susceptible to chemotherapy while protecting normal cells, potentially increasing treatment efficacy.

    •    Combination Therapies: Research combining fasting-mimicking diets with treatments like vitamin C has shown promise in slowing cancer progression.

 

2. Immune System Modulation:

    •    Natural Killer Cells Activation: Fasting periods may reprogram the immune system’s natural killer cells to better combat cancer.

 

3. Metabolic Effects:

    •    Reduced Insulin-Like Growth Factor (IGF-1): Fasting can lower IGF-1 levels, a marker associated with increased cancer risk.

    •    Autophagy Enhancement: Fasting promotes autophagy, a cellular housekeeping process that removes damaged cells, potentially inhibiting cancer development.

 

4. Clinical Considerations:

    •    Nutritional Risks: While fasting shows potential benefits, it may also pose risks such as malnutrition, especially in cancer patients who are already nutritionally compromised.

    •    Individual Variability: The effects of fasting can vary based on cancer type, stage, and individual patient health, necessitating personalized medical advice.

 

Conclusion:

While fasting presents a promising adjunct to traditional cancer treatments, it should not replace conventional therapies. Ongoing research continues to explore its efficacy and safety. Patients should consult with their healthcare providers before initiating any fasting regimen to ensure it aligns with their overall treatment plan and health status.

 

[Thought Art]

The point being Alkaline Diet, and fasting to help cancer can not simply be categorized as pseudoscience but should be looked at through a more nuanced lens. 

[Thought Art]

@integral Your point on deodorants is interesting. However, are you really an expert on deodorants and how the body deals with the chemicals in them? Particularly Aluminum?

[Thought Art]

@integral I looked into the BPA thing she said. So apparently BPA is metabolized through the liver and excreted and it doesn’t bioaccumulate.

 

However, I am open to receipts affecting you if you touch them regularly in high volume over long periods and looking into that effect on body.

Microplastics are different in nature than BPA. Microplastics bio-accumulate.

 

Edited January 14 by Thought Art

[integral]

11 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@integral Your point on deodorants is interesting. However, are you really an expert on deodorants and how the body deals with the chemicals in them? Particularly Aluminum?

No, and anyone that says they are is missing the bigger picture. There’s are too many variables to know. It is an open system and highly complex. You can’t know therefore you have to make an educated guess. And risking it because one study or some mechanism has proven that aluminum is perfectly safe to put on your body is not a wise way protect yourself.

The Strategy here is to acknowledging that there is no way to know what is true, so we have to take the least amount of risk. Using some highly toxic companies product and just dumping it on your body is unnecessary risk when there’s alternatives that are simply less risky.

The moment the person in that video has a health problem they can’t solve they will use all the knowledge they have available and fail, then they will start experimenting with all that pseudoscience. lol

people are allowed to believe whatever they want as long as their own survival doesn’t depend on their belief being true. You can believe the Earth is flat because it has no effect on your survival.

Edited January 14 by integral

[Thought Art]

@integral Well, if you say you can’t know for sure your point is sort of moot no?

Saying deodorant with aluminum is a risk is interesting. If you can’t know, then it’s just a fear you have until some evidence of brought forward. 
 

I would suspect mass marketed deodorant has levels of toxicity. I would assume that as it’s known that even in the food industry there is a lot of toxicity in foods as Leo and Bryan Johnson are pointing out. I would assume but I don’t know. 
 

Also, Aluminum being one ingredient of many potential variables I would be wary to over generalized that one ingredient when there are many that may be toxic. It may be it may not be. I didn’t look into this one yet.

For example, we should do some internal archeology as to where the belief that aluminum was dangerous and if it was a study done… why bias toward that study and not a study which showed it was harmless? Very interesting and challenging.

Edited January 14 by Thought Art

[integral]

7 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@integral I looked into the BPA thing she said. So apparently BPA is metabolized through the liver and excreted and it doesn’t bioaccumulate.

Microplastics are different in nature than BPA. Microplastics bio-accumulate.

 

That makes sense. Brian Johnson is accumulating micro plastics into his testicles,  It seems. lol

It doesn’t matter that there’s evidence that  BPA is highly metabolized, if $1 billion is put on doing research for this specific thing. I’m sure they’re gonna discover 101 effect this stuff has on the body that are unrelated to accumulation.

Just because it doesn’t accumulate, doesn’t mean it’s safe, and that we shouldn’t avoid it.

[Thought Art]

Is aluminum in deodorant actually dangerous?

ChatGPT: 

 

Aluminum compounds are commonly used in antiperspirants to reduce sweating by temporarily blocking sweat ducts. Concerns have been raised about potential health risks associated with aluminum exposure, particularly links to breast cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and kidney issues. Here’s what current research indicates:

 

Breast Cancer:

    •    Research Findings: Extensive studies have investigated the potential link between aluminum-containing antiperspirants and breast cancer. A comprehensive review published in Critical Reviews in Toxicology found no correlation between aluminum in antiperspirants and an increased risk of breast cancer.

 

Alzheimer’s Disease:

    •    Research Findings: Earlier studies suggested a possible connection between aluminum exposure and Alzheimer’s disease. However, subsequent research has not established a clear link between the use of aluminum-containing antiperspirants and the development of Alzheimer’s. The Alzheimer’s Association states that studies have failed to confirm any role for aluminum in causing Alzheimer’s.

 

Kidney Disease:

    •    Research Findings: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires antiperspirant labels to advise individuals with kidney disease to consult a doctor before use. This caution is primarily for those with significantly impaired kidney function (stage 4 or 5 kidney disease), as their kidneys may struggle to process aluminum. For individuals with healthy kidney function, the small amount of aluminum absorbed through the skin is not considered harmful.

 

Skin Irritation:

    •    Research Findings: Some individuals may experience skin irritation or allergic reactions to aluminum compounds in antiperspirants. Symptoms can include redness, itching, or rash. Switching to aluminum-free deodorants may alleviate these issues for those affected.

 

Regulatory Stance:

    •    Health Organizations: Both the National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society have stated that there is no conclusive evidence linking the use of aluminum-containing antiperspirants to cancer. Similarly, organizations focused on Alzheimer’s research have found no convincing evidence associating aluminum exposure with the disease.

 

Conclusion:

Current scientific evidence does not support the notion that aluminum in antiperspirants poses significant health risks to the general population. However, individuals with severe kidney impairment should consult their healthcare provider before using such products. Those experiencing skin irritation may consider trying aluminum-free alternatives.

 

[Thought Art]

3 minutes ago, integral said:

That makes sense. Brian Johnson is accumulating micro plastics into his testicles,  It seems. lol

It doesn’t matter that there’s evidence that  BPA is highly metabolized, if $1 billion is put on doing research for this specific thing. I’m sure they’re gonna discover 101 effect this stuff has on the body that are unrelated to accumulation.

Just because it doesn’t accumulate, doesn’t mean it’s safe, and that we shouldn’t avoid it.

1. We all probably have plastic in our testicals if we have testicals. Ever human on the planet likely I has microplastics. 
 

2. I think that’s a good point. BPA may not bioaccumulate but it may cause harm. However, where the body is able to excrete it we should be able to simply avoid it and it gets cleared out. We also need to be realistic about how much a certain action actually exposes to us and how toxic it is

Edited January 14 by Thought Art

[integral]

17 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

@integral Well, if you say you can’t know for sure your point is sort of moot no?

Saying deodorant with aluminum is a risk is interesting. If you can’t know, then it’s just a fear you have until some evidence of brought forward. 
 

I would suspect mass marketed deodorant has levels of toxicity. I would assume that as it’s known that even in the food industry there is a lot of toxicity in foods as Leo and Bryan Johnson are pointing out. I would assume but I don’t know. 

In the real world there's unknowns and we have to do the best we can with these unknowns. We don't need to consume aluminum as its possibly not a nutrient, our body doesn't need it. Can we easily avoid aluminum? Yes. So let's just avoid it. lol

I think the first step is to write out the strategy so we know what how to tackle the problem. Most people have a default strategy that they're unconscious of. Also known as their epistemology of what they think is true or isn't true. In our case we want to maximize health but there's so many variables that is impossible to know what is true so let's come up with a strategy to do the best we can. 

Quote

Also, Aluminum being one ingredient of many potential variables I would be wary to over generalized that one ingredient when there are many that may be toxic. It may be it may not be. I didn’t look into this one yet.

For example, we should do some internal archeology as to where the belief that aluminum was dangerous and if it was a study done… why bias toward that study and not a study which showed it was harmless? Very interesting and challenging.

That's the main point is there so many ingredients = variables, and they interact with so many different systems within the body that it's impossible to make sense of this without a billion dollars funneled into researching it.

Edited January 14 by integral

[integral]

And even at that there's going to be so many outliers that are just outside of what a human race can figure out at this point in time with the tools that we have. 

You could have some random gene or some random bacteria in your intestine that's interacting with it strangely and after 30 years it will give you a weakened heart. And after 30 years you'll have no idea why you have a weakened heart.

All of these studies are short-term isolated with horse Flyers on. They cannot take into account larger time frames like 10 plus years. And the ones that do take on larger time frames are only tracking certain variables and everything all the other variables.

Edited January 14 by integral

[Thought Art]

1 hour ago, integral said:

 That's the main point is there so many ingredients = variables, and they interact with so many different systems within the body that it's impossible to make sense of this without a billion dollars funneled into researching it.

That’s true about 1000s a things in life right now.