I find that remarkable considering the fact that astronauts would eat high protein foods to minimize their bowel movements because the human body will efficiently absorb highly bioavailable proteins and fat (e.g. from animal sources) it consumes. Considering human feces are 75% water and the remaining 25% are primarily bacterial biomass and plant matter, my guess is the carnivores you know have just started the diet and have upset their stomachs with the sudden change.
Can’t wait for the year of the vibe coded OS.
Isotopic testing shows that early humans primarily subsisted on herbivores and small game, including fish. Please refer to this study for Europe.
Early modern humans also appear to have regularly hunted large herbivores (55–57), but there is also evidence for the use of small game, including fish at some of these sites (15, 16).
Or this study, also from Nature, again studying the first modern humans and late Neandertals in Europe:
based on stable isotopes, the mammoth seems to contribute the major part of the dietary protein of humans in a time range between 50,000 and 30,000 years ago and across wide areas spanning from SW France11 to the Crimean Peninsula53 (Fig. 6, Supplementary Fig. 5–8).
It is inaccurate to state that humans did not eat much meat prior to modern times.
Next time I meet up with my mouse friends I’ll be sure to let them know.
Word of mouth existed long before advertising, and as for algorithmic discoverability retailers do a fine job of that already.
“It’s my ccomputer” has already been mentioned, but it’s my bandwidth and my home network too. Ads can stay off it.
Fundamentally, the concept that your computer can actually look at your screen and is context aware is going to become an important modality for us going forward.”
Since I don’t feel the need for ambience nor multi-modal experiences in my OS, considering the implementation of that “modality” I’m afraid that even as a long-time Windows user I’m going to have to switch to another OS that closer aligns to my needs.
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
The association is funded by a number of food multinationals, pharmaceutical companies, and food industry lobbying groups, such as the National Confectioners Association. The Academy has faced controversy regarding corporate influence and its relationship with the food industry and funding from corporate groups such as McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, Mars, and others.
…
During fiscal year 2015, the organisation received $1.1 million in corporate sponsorship’s from companies like General Mills, Coca-Cola and Pepsi Co via donations, joint initiatives, and programs.
Emphasis mine. As always, it’s important to view all organizations in the context of their relationship with other larger and more influential organizations.
If there’s a game that ever needed stringent anticheat, it’s Battlefield.
Those pesky ethics committees…
256 = 200 + 56, initially they only wanted 200 people in a chatroom but decided 56 more was even better, so it’s very oddly specific indeed.
Nobody says that all vegetables are ultraprocessed, that would be a silly statement to make. However, UPFs are mostly made with plant material.
There’s nothing uplifting about more UPFs.
I’ll add my voice to this too. You should eat no UPF whatsoever.
Every major health organisation in the world says they’re linked to cardiovascular disease and should be limited in diets
The reasons for this make for interesting reading, when you have the time.
You may misinterpreting the terms used. The “foods” within quotation marks are a specific industrially processed product:
From Taraz Foods:
After extraction, the juice is taken through an evaporation process where much of the water is extracted. Most times, this is performed under low heat to make sure the flavor and all other nutritious components within are preserved. What results from the process is a thick, concentrated liquid, usually then pasteurized to eliminate unwanted bacteria. Finally, it’s packaged and shipped off to be used in various products.
This isn’t fruit juice that has been reduced using kitchenware.
Mechanically separated meat (MSM), mechanically recovered/reclaimed meat (MRM), or mechanically deboned meat (MDM) is a paste-like meat product produced by forcing pureed or ground beef, pork, mutton, turkey or chicken under high pressure through a sieve or similar device to separate the bone from the edible meat tissue. When poultry is used, it is sometimes called white slime as an analog to meat-additive pink slime and to meat extracted by advanced meat recovery systems, both of which are different processes. The process entails pureeing or grinding the carcass left after the manual removal of meat from the bones and then forcing the slurry through a sieve under pressure.
The resulting product is a blend primarily consisting of tissues not generally considered meat, along with a much smaller amount of actual meat (muscle tissue). In some countries such as the United States, these non-meat materials are processed separately for human and non-human uses and consumption.[1] The process is controversial; Forbes, for example, called it a “not-so-appetizing meat production process”.[2]
Mechanically separated meat has been used in certain meat and meat products, such as hot dogs and bologna sausage,[2] since the late 1960s. However, not all such meat products are manufactured using an MSM process.
This isn’t meat that has been cut up or even ground up using tools in the kitchen.
foods that are not heavily processed and are benign for your health to be labeled as unhealthy
With respect, which foods, according to whom, on the basis of what?
more evidence of how atrocious the whole field of nutrition is
I agree. Even studies that account for socioeconomic status and relative fitness levels are still not science, but that’s epidemiological studies for you. To quote @jet@hackertalks.com, “Epidemiology is not science, it’s the start of science, but it cannot establish causation.” And yes, they are epidemiological studies, but Nova class 4 is is the class associated with all the chronic metabolic diseases, and yet not Nova class 1 through 3.
The Nova classification is far better than any current mainstream “dietary recommendation” or guidelines. It’s a large step in the right direction, so I wouldn’t brush it off as “arbitrary” just because it’s not perfect. At the very least, it’s useful as a tool to flag a class of products that are designed and marketed to promote overconsumption and that displace whole foods, and it needn’t be the only tool we use.
It’s not arbitrary. The definition is very clear. Group 4, classified as ultraprocessed. I’ve broken it up to make it easier to read:
Industrially manufactured food products made up of several ingredients (formulations) including sugar, oils, fats and salt (generally in combination and in higher amounts than in processed foods) and food substances of no or rare culinary use (such as high-fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, modified starches and protein isolates). Group 1 foods are absent or represent a small proportion of the ingredients in the formulation.
Processes enabling the manufacture of ultra-processed foods include industrial techniques such as extrusion, moulding and pre-frying; application of additives including those whose function is to make the final product palatable or hyperpalatable such as flavours, colourants, non-sugar sweeteners and emulsifiers; and sophisticated packaging, usually with synthetic materials.
Processes and ingredients here are designed to create highly profitable (low-cost ingredients, long shelf-life, emphatic branding), convenient (ready-to-(h)eat or to drink), tasteful alternatives to all other Nova food groups and to freshly prepared dishes and meals.
Ultra-processed foods are operationally distinguishable from processed foods by the presence of food substances of no culinary use (varieties of sugars such as fructose, high-fructose corn syrup, ‘fruit juice concentrates’, invert sugar, maltodextrin, dextrose and lactose; modified starches; modified oils such as hydrogenated or interesterified oils; and protein sources such as hydrolysed proteins, soya protein isolate, gluten, casein, whey protein and ‘mechanically separated meat’) or of additives with cosmetic functions (flavours, flavour enhancers, colours, emulsifiers, emulsifying salts, sweeteners, thickeners and anti-foaming, bulking, carbonating, foaming, gelling and glazing agents) in their list of ingredients.
What about Rumble? GN is on there and directly supportable.