Messages

Having studied nutrition for two years as part of my uni course I couldn't resist sticking my nose in here.

Meowster is right. A Big Mac doesn't become more healthy just because you drink some orange juice with it. The overloaded carlorific content of the Big Mac stays the same, and in fact you're just taking in more calories from the orange juice. Eating a Big Mac a day isn't healthy no matter how many pairs of rose tinted specs you put on!

Regarding the Atkins diet issue. The way to lose weight is via a change to a healthier overall lifestyle.  Period.

Any fad diet, whether it be Atkins or something else, will allow you to lose weight in the short term as Misj' says,  however almost invariably (and the percentage figure is very very high) you wil gain more weight in the long term and end up heavier than you were to start with.

This is what perplexes me about the Atkins Diet though. People DO lose weight on it (whether it's unhealthy or not, the fact remains that they still lose bloody loads of weight), and I can't see a reasonable reason for it. It's not just water weight. I understand what water weight is, and they did not just lose water weight - they lost about 30lbs of actual, visible weight... and very quickly. Quicker than I do with my extremely healthy calorie-controlled diet and shitloads of exercise.

Also I don't know what constitutes a fad diet but from my understanding of what that means, the Atkins diet isn't one, as I've seen it working with people. I wouldn't do it because I'm happy doing things my healthy way, but I have seen it work remarkably well in terms of aesthetics

When I look at the things people eat/drink on Atkins, not only does the (what I understand to be) unhealthy aspect of it make me shudder, but it also doesn't make sense that so much weight should be lost so quickly. There seem to be two Atkins camps - steadfastly against and steadfastly for the Atkins diet. I would love to hear an unbiased and educated opinion on it, simply because the whole thing perplexes me.

Sorry we hijacked the other thread

@Meowster: That's the general public's view, and that's the reason why organic food can be sold at higher prices.
This view stems from the popular belief that "artificial/industrial/processed = bad, natural = good", which, of course, is also not always true, not even most of the time.
Here's a study that nicely links both recent topics:
A comparison of the vitamin C content of fresh and frozen vegetables

There are many similar wrong ideas that are widely believed to be true, e.g. that fast food is bad in general.
But eating a Big Mac every day is fine, as long as you balance it with, say, a glass of orange juice.
Another example are the alleged beneficial effects of eating green salad. It has the nutritional value of a piece of paper.
Or take diets: a diet will cause a gain of weight, not weight-loss. Exercise will cause weight-loss, a diet will simply make the body use better what ends up inside of it, thus decrease what gets discarded.

(Note that these are not personal beliefs I just pulled out of my ass but insight gained from scientific studies.)

But, like I said, this thread is about Oliwerko's swollen throat, so unless it's OK with him, we might discuss this in another thread.

I get what you're saying - it's all about balance. But that still does not mean a big mac is good for you just because you balance it with something that is. The calorie, sugar, salt contents of such foods are actually not good bad for you. It doesn't mean you're immediately gonna die from having one obviously, and man I am such a sucker for McDonalds breakfasts occasionally... but it doesn't mean they're good for you either.

And regarding diets: again, it's about balance and also knowing the details. Exercise and a healthy low-calorie diet will make you lose weight faster than either of those alone. There is a benefit to restricting your calorie intake in terms of weight loss, so long as you do it right and don't make your body think it is starving.

There are scientific studies to support both sides of the argument unforunately

But since you've done a lot of reading about this, maybe you can answer a question I've had for a while regarding the Atkins Diet. One of my friends did this diet and holy crap, did he lose weight quickly - and he did not supplement it with exercise. I've been losing weight quite quickly recently just by eating lots of salads, fish and veggies, and doing lots of sports like rock climbing and running. But even though I'm pleased with the rate I'm losing weight, I still don't understand how the Atkins Diet works.

There have been a whole bunch of scientific studies about it, and how it works, and though there are arguments to support lots of different theories, the overall concensious SEEMS to be that

1. The Atkins Diet can make people feel nauseous which makes them eat less
2. It restricts the things you're allowed to eat so that it's almost impossible overeat your daily calorie allowance anyway (for instance you're allowed to eat all the butter you want, but since you're not allowed pasta, bread, crackers etc... you have nothing to put it on....)
3. The body being in ketosis reduces the appetite

So overall the Atkins Diet allegedly has the same impact as a low calorie diet because people end up eating less.

But I don't know if this can be true because my low calorie diet and loads of sports/exercise (which I'm currently doing to get into prime shape for climbing, so I'm doing it in the healthiest effing way possible) is not making me lose weight nearly as fast as someone doing Atkins and NO exercise.

I think I remember reading that calories obtained from carb-rich foods get turned into fat more easily than non-carb foods, I don't know if this is true or if that could be part of the reason why Atkins works.

Anyone got any ideas?

Don't know about l-absorbic acid but actually that equation is quite accurate as far as I know. Vitamins do get destroyed in the cooking, freezing, and soaking processes, and start to deteriorate as soon as the vegetable is picked meaning that - yup, the fresher the better.

If by "bio-food" you mean organic (I'm not too good with all these terms I'm afraid), then as far as I know it does actually make a difference in terms of how healthy it is even if only because organic food tends to go "off" faster and so is generally fresher when consumed. I don't know too much other stuff about organic veg though.

So it is important to eat healthily or you will suffer ill effects from it and one of the symptoms can be a lowered immune system of course. And eating a lot of processed/frozen food is notoriously bad for you... lots of fresh veggies and fruits and fish, nom nom nom!

I don't think it is a stupid way of looking at things, could you elaborate on why you think so a little more? Also dude, there was no need to be so rude.

Boyd, (legal) immigrants are entitled to nothing at all until their first two years of a working history in the UK, by which point they have paid taxes and contributed towards their own benefit allowance (should they ever need it). This is more than a lot of UK families who have contributed precisely nothing for their entire lives, whether or not other people (family members or otherwise) are "paying for them" or however you want to phrase it.

When is it that you think immigrants are jumped straight onto benefits? The only time I know of this to happen is when the immigrants are asylum seekers and then it is done in order to protect them. Sure some of them are probably not truly asylum seekers and take advantage of the system (I've met one) but that's the same as how UK individuals can do the same thing (I've met several).

Anyway the point is that immigrants (unless under special circumstances ie asylum granted) do not get benefits until they have contributed at least two years working history in the UK. And as for the argument that someone mentioned earlier about them making money here and then taking their savings back and spending it in their own country - that works both ways you know

Does anyone remember the story about the woman who was refused the Morning After pill because the muslim chemist chappy was within his rights to refuse to give it to her on religious grounds? That was appalling and afaik it is still perfectly within their right to do so. I think that kind of softy approach (such as adopting aspects of sharia law that clearly have the capacity to put women in this country at risk) is pretty bad. I would find it hard not to be resentful of this if I was refused the morning after pill in order to protect the religious rights of the chemist - what about my rights as a woman? Why do his religious rights get preference over my rights?

Renal, I read about Sharia law a long time ago when it was introduced so I forget the finer details, but I do remember seeing aspects of it that really shocked me, because essentially it creates an opportunity for women under sharia law to be treated differently and have different (and lesser) rights than other UK women. I also remember reading that the reason is got in in the first place was because there is already a Jewish version of it that was developed decades ago - is that right? Something like this? I'm not sure of the details of Jewish courts but I am pretty sure they exist, hence they could not refuse the request for Sharia Law. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong because obviously I'm sketchy with the details as I'm old now (my second wisdom tooth emerged yesterday), and my memory fails me frequently in my old and wise age.

Maybe not in Brighton, but there area where my parents live, it's a different story.  There's van loads of immigrants working on the farms for less than minimum wage.  That £8 an hour for picking strawberries is overpaid, and I'd have personally gone for it in an instant.  They're picking cabbages in Lincolnshire for a quarter of that.

Currently, I'm unemployed.  I'm not pleased about it, and I spend most of my time trying to get a job.  Due to past issues, I'm not exactly a great candidate.  I got ill during my A-Levels which meant I couldn't work for 5 or so years*, and then stuck the same cack job for about 5 years, then had nervous breakdown and went into hiding for 2 years.

So now, I'm pushing 30, have almost no experience, and only GCSEs as qualifications.  I don't personally care what the job is, I did one that was over-worked, under-paid and labour intensive for years, and I was the only one who'd be willing to do 18 hour shifts, despite not getting proper overtime wages.  I busted my ass for that company doing 4 peoples work because they couldn't afford more staff, and I got crapped on when the management changed.  So crap jobs don't bother me.

I've applied to cleaning jobs, I've applied to laboring ones, I've applied for pretty much anything that I'd stand a vague chance of getting.  Just because some of the losers on the dole don't want to work a shitty job, doesn't mean that no British person does.  I can't blame the immigrants as readily as some areas, as there's just not as many of them up here in the North East.  There is a 2 bedroom house on my street with 9 foreigners (Poles and Turks, I think) living in, and they're all working though.  I think one of those foreigners is a drug dealer, or so I'm told.

Back in London, though, the crappy section of jobs were mostly either chavs or immigrants, and the chavs didn't work very hard, whilst most of the immigrants would actually try to work hard.  The immigrants I worked with had the problem of not being too great with English, so they'd end up screwing up tasks, and making me redo their work again.  The chavs just did stuff slow, so I'd have to finish their tasks for them.  Either way, it meant more work for me.  By the time I left that job, it was me and two other non-chavvy Brits doing a 12 person shift, whilst 4 other people dicked about and made things harder.  (Even if they bothered working, we were still under-staffed).

I think I may have lost my train of thought here.  I've just got home from signing on again, so I'm rather pissed off.  Apologies for coherence issues.

*(The government said I couldn't work, I couldn't even sign on.  Was on Incapacity Benefit for years, because the doctor's were still running tests, and couldn't bump it to a Disablity Benefit.  Which meant I had to get a new doctor's note each month, which was probably more degrading to me than signing on).

the £8 an hour was just a point to prove that this particular group of people claiming they couldn't get jobs because of foreigners were actually just lazy and wouldn't accept something that was even quite substantially above minimum wage. There are of course loads of people (particularly recently) who are struggling to find work due to the recession... but there still exists a huge portion of english people who mistreat the benefits system and then jump on the "they're tekkin' our jobs!!!" bandwagon which they really don't  understand anyway.

It sounds like it can be very different in different parts of the UK. I'm sorry you saw something kicking off in Brighton... I was once with a German friend when someone started on him for having a foreign accent. Unfortunately there are assholes everywhere, but at least in Brighton they are far and few between and we usually laugh them off the streets pretty quickly


Also:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFG2P-toC6k

They took errr jerbs!

The jobs are there for everyone to apply for. Things such as cleaning jobs, service industry jobs were always minimum wage/low paid even before immigrants started to come here in any significant number. If there are more foreign people in such jobs it just suggests that more foreign people than UK people applied, which is fitting with the UK "I'm not prepared to do that!" attitude. People don't get preference for minimum wage jobs based on whether they're foreign or not. At least that's the way it is in Brighton....

Nacho, are you getting immigrants and asylum seekers confused? I'm just wondering. I have no idea about how it works in Spain but your examples sound rather one sided and extreme... as in, I'm sure there must be a reason (whether it's valid or not) that such policies are in place - are they trying to encourage skilled immigrants to come to Spain or something?

In the UK immigrants certainly do not have more rights than citizens, but there is a common misperception (generally by the BNP-voting types I would imagine) that they do. "They come over here stealing our jobs and living off our benefits" = more rights somehow, even though immigrants aren't even allowed benefits unless they have a two year working history here... by which time they've actually earned the benefits they might receive far more than the UK person complaining about it who has lived on benefits their whole life.

Same happens with inmigration... Every society paid a big price for being as it is. Every citizen of that country, or its ancestors paid a price. Wars, revolutions, taxes... Honestly, I don't see fair that everyone can come to my country and have my same rights... As I would never expect to go to a wealthier country than mine and ask for the same rights as every citizen of that place from the first day.

You did not take part in any war or revolution yourself, Nacho, so I find it strange you use that as an example for why immigrants should not have the same rights as you. Also, you are assuming these people came from a less wealthy country - I'm not sure why that's an important detail to you, but I'm guessing you're mixing up immigrants and asylum seekers or something? What about all the immigrants who can speak Spanish and work decent jobs and integrate into society? Then again I don't know Spain that well, maybe that doesn't happen over there so much as it does in the UK.

Also what rights are you talking about exactly, rights to benefits etc?

Additionally... isn't that what being part of the EU is about? I'm sure Spanish people avail of the ability to move freely between EU countries and avail of good levels of support as much as any other EU citizens

IMO the award for the worst and most frequent cases of abuse of the system in the UK go to the UK citizens themselves. There have recently been changes made to the benefits system in an attempt to stop people from living their entire lives on benefits without once getting a job. There are so many cases of very young girls having babies at 15 so they can move out of home and "start their own life", then spend their whole life on benefits and defend themselves by saying "being a mother is a full time job". I once saw a documentary where some guys were standing outside the jobcentre (to the foreign people: where you get your benefits) drinking cheap lager, waiting for their turn to go inside, when the cameraman asked them why they were unemployed. The usual "foreign people tekkin' our jobs innit!" chat occurred, and then the camera said that he had a job for them for £8 an hour picking strawberries. They all turned it down because they didn't want to pick strawberries.

On the other hand, all of the immigrants I know have exactly the opposite attitude. I suppose they're very driven and ambitious people anyway - they were ambitious enough to immigrate abroad for their career in the first place. Hey, I'm an immigrant and I'm working in the worst place you could imagine just to earn some extra cash for my course in September... my UK boyfriend at no point considering lowering himself to that point because he was too proud to take steps backward in his career, if even just for a short while... he would rather have lived on the benefits he felt he was entitled to until he found a new job (which he did, but still I think the attitude is a generally a bad one).

Could you have some kind of auto immune deficiency disorder-type thing? A chap I know of has something that effects his immune system and makes him very prone to be struck down badly by illnesses, and for prolonged periods of time.

I think I could be talking about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunodeficiency

Unfortunately I don't know the chap well enough to walk up to him and ask him what health problems he has exactly  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/audio/2009/jun/09/bnp-barnsley-european-election

Some of the people in this audio clip make me feel so sad.

More interesting reading: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23470426-details/Women+more+troubled+by+bag+theft+than+rape,+BNP+candidate+claims/article.do

And finally, they're actually breaking discrimination laws with their membership criteria which states only white people are allowed to join... http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/08/bnp-legal-challenges

I'm not saying having the discussion's pointless, as it MIGHT make someone rethink their opinion.  I don't want you having any allusions that this thread might make the world a better place, though.  

No, and I'm not saying or hoping it will, that is not my goal here (though if it makes a couple of non-voters feel ashamed then that is excellent ), but I still want to discuss it with people whether or not it "makes a difference". It makes for an interesting discussion and also I think that though one thread will obviously not make a noticeable difference, in general the more things like this are discussed by people, the better. An awful lot of UKers really don't care about politics enough to vote, maybe heated discussions and debates can over time, spark a little bit more interest in it for people. It can only be a good thing to get people talking about things like this.

I disagree strongly with Nacho saying that it's a childish tantrum or anything similar to bring this topic to an internet forum... forums are here for discussions and this is as good a discussion as any other. Intelligent heated discussion over political issues, Nacho, is not pointless or equivelent to throwing a childish tantrum no matter whether it makes a difference or not. It certainly makes a difference for me to see others viewpoints and opinions.

As for getting into politics - haha, thanks, but although I get quite passionate about things etc., I'm not the kind of personality that would do well in politics. Additionally, most details of politics bore me greatly, except the part where I get everything on expenses of course.

The details of the protest are a little sad. I'm glad that people did protest, but it seems these things always get out of hand due to a few idiots. In Brighton recently there were some protests against an arms manufacturer, and although most people were peaceful and really cared about what they were protesting, I met a few people who really were just there for the mayhem. I was trying to figure out what the protest was about by asking people, and one chap replied "I dunno, I came down here from Cambridge 'cos I just love the mayhem to be honest!". He also told me stories about how he'd kicked in a police car and tried to break the window of a McDonalds just for fun... what an ass. It's unfortunate that most protests seem to get lumped with chaps like that

Dude, I disagree that internet forum discussion is just having a childish tantrum (necessarily) and/or pointless. The more discussion there is about this the better as far as I can see - maybe next time the voter turnout won't be so ridiculously low. Hopefully all the media attention from all this will show people how important it is that they vote, instead of having the attitude that it doesn't matter or somehow doesn't affect them. Same goes for the internet. Forum discussions ftw, I say!

Honestly Boyd... wtf? I hate to rise to trolling, but I would like you to take another look at the post I made. I alluded to you only briefly to point out that there was no need for your anger, the rest of the reply was because of the other intelligent discussion on the thread and primarily in reply to Pumaman and Renal and absolutely nothing to do with your trollish replies. I don't want you to be under any delusion that your trollish replies caused me to somehow magically post something worthwhile, as that was your apparent alterior motive for being a bit of a dick. Also I wasn't offended particularly, but this sentence still doesn't make sense:

I won't apologise for any offense I may have caused because it's unintended and therefore not my fault if you're offended by it.

It's the fault of the person who was offended so long as the offence was unintentional? Do I even need to explain why this is a ridiculous statement?


bicilotti - that was pretty much a direct story from a guy I spoke to last week, hence I used it as an example as it was at the forefront of my memory. Honestly, wasn't a rushed sentence. I hear many many variations of the same excuse, it can be incredibly depressing. Notice though that I pointed out that this is behaviour particular to the group of people I work with, who are people who have befallen a very particular set of circumstances. I didn't want anyone to think I was talking about all poor/lower class/disadvantaged/etc people.  

Slightly off-topic now... Where I'm currently working, almost every day there will be at least two or three people late for their appointments here and when they are refused entry, will fly into (sometimes violent) rages. "It wasn't my fault I was late, I got arrested for shoplifted, it was the fucking coppers fault I was late" is usually the excuse used. I wonder whether it's the tendancy to blame others for all of lifes problems that puts these people where they are in life, or the fact that they are where they are that puts them in this position where they feel they have to blame others? Whatever it is, I've noticed that it is commonly linked with racism and this belief that it's the fault of immigrants that they are where they are.

Also after writing all of this I've just realised... My summer job sucks

So yeah I think it's sad that the mainstream parties are so rubbish with so little backbone that people feel disallusioned by them and vote BNP. But also I think that it's more than that - there is a small but unpleasant undercurrent of ignorance, racism, misogynism, religious hatred etc in the UK, and it's just really sad to see an actual figure like this I guess.

I think it's pretty dangerous to be all wolly about the BNP by saying "it's not racial hatred, it's just free speech even though it's pretty appaling free speech", it sort of gives them a certain degree of validation that they shouldn't be getting. No matter how they try and spin it they represent everything that is rephrensible about British (or any) culture, and even the tiniest hint that they're gaining momentum should worry every single clear minded person currently living in the UK.

Ahhh also, I agree with this. I am kinda torn as although I would love them to be outlawed as a party, some people point out it's not right to simply "shut up" people who have views I don't like - fair enough. But you've worded it well there.

However, apparently they're not gaining momentum particularly - I read somewhere that they got less votes than in 2004, but the low voter turnout caused them to get seats this time. Not sure how true that is but if it's true, it makes me a bit happier... at least idiot non-voters are to blame, instead of there being some sudden explosion of fuckwits in the UK.

Whoa, a little unprovoked aggression/trolling from Boyd? Dude there was hardly a need for any of that. Closet BNP supporter?

Anyways, the issue with the BNP isn't just racism either - there's a whole lot wrong with that party besides simply racism.

Pumaman, I'm not so sure that most people vote for the BNP out of desperation. I met a couple of old English people in Spain once, they'd retired together out there, had plenty of money, but had grown up with the idea that immigrants are all troublemakers, blacks are all thieves, England isn't what it used to be, yadda yadda yadda... and I remember having to sit in silence biting my lip hard while they talked about the BNP having the right idea trying to get rid of the blacks and immigrants. They also read the Daily Mail like it was the best news source on the planet I do truly believe that there are people out there who still think in this way and believe that the BNP are great.

A friend of mine dated a girl for four years and she hid it from her parents because they would never accept a white non-muslim man into their family; another friend had a similar story but was not accepted by her family because he was black. And all this in the UK which we all think is pretty forward-thinking until we meet people like this and realise perhaps it's not all quite so...

I think the people you are speaking of who vote "out of desperation" are probably also mislead by BNP campaigns into believing that immigrants are responsible for all the UKs problems, etc etc. I got a BNP leaflet through my door a few weeks back that essentially said this. So yeah, I guess I can see why people with only half a brain would believe this  unquestionably. Still though, it's epicly disappointing for me... I think the final figures were 900,000ish votes for BNP throughout the whole of the UK. That's an awful lot of fuckwits.

EDIT: Actually I just thought I'd throw in - I've been doing a lot of work with a certain group of disadvantaged people recently. Most of them are homeless or in shabby council housing, have drug habits and alcohol problems etc. Most came from lower class but reasonable backgrounds, with an education and married parents, stable enough home environment etc. However they've fallen into the position they are in life because of various problems such as drugs, too unintelligent to look after themselves, crime, etc. In many of the cases you could argue that the reason they're where they are is primarily their own fault (this is particular to the group I work with).

Most of them are white men or women from the local area, born and bred in Brighton which is an incredibly open-minded and laid-back place where you can be gay, straight, or transgender, black white or anything inbetween... whoever you want, and nobody will care.

However, they're mostly all very racist and narrow minded people. They often blame others for their problems - they blame the fact they can't find a job on immigrants. They heard this somewhere, I guess, and then repeat it back to other people to excuse the fact they're too lazy/stupid/on drugs to find anything themselves, until the point where they really start to believe it I think. They blame black people on the fact they can't get council housing - and not the fact that they got kicked out of every council house they were in for smashing down doors/windows. And if you ask them why they can't articulate why very well... "because they come in and take our jobs innit, them blacks what are working in McDonalds and that like" etc etc. Blame blame blame blame, and they all have little toddlers that come in with them, learning what they see/hear.

Holy shit.

This is true; voter apathy is to blame. I still find it incredible that 120,000 people in Yorkshire voted BNP. I hope all of you who could, did vote...

Also I recognise that people have the right to free speech, however I thought it WAS illegal to promote racial hatred in the UK and as far as I can see, there has been plenty of evidence of them doing just that. It's crossing the line between free speech and hate-mongering.

We bang on about Islam. Why? ...If we were to attack some other ethnic group â€" some people say we should attack the Jews … But … we've got to get to power. And if that was an issue we chose to bang on about when the press don't talk about it … the public would just think...'oh, you're attacking Jews just because you want to attack Jews. You're attacking this group of powerful Zionists just because you want to take poor Manny Cohen the tailor and shove him in a gas chamber.' That's what the public would think. It wouldn't get us anywhere other than stepping backwards...And we wouldn't get power.

Suggested policies to help police this "threat to all of us" include a Muslim no-fly policy, which would ban Muslims from flying in and out of the UK.

Founder John Tyndall proclaimed that "Mein Kampf is my bible".

They've just won two seats in the European Parliament, with 120,000 in Yorkshire voting BNP.

So two questions - first of all, why would anybody ever support the BNP? And secondly, how is such an incredibly racist party allowed to exist? Surely what they do is illegal?

Nick Griffin comes out with shit like "the most tragic victims of a multi-racial society are the mixed race children it produces". I thought promoting racial hatred was illegal, no?

Wow Nikolas, what did you use to make these?

That looks amazing, Trent R. Will definitely try to check that out. If anyone else has any other similar links, would be cool to share.

Could this be the first book you mentioned?

Vict0r you are my hero... that is the very book! Holy crap you have no idea how happy you've just made me.

I think the Colour Wizard is the other book too. I've ordered both and they should arrive tomorrow. Thank you so much everyone