Who IS this guy?!

'Niceguy' Eddie

Political Talk Show Host and Internet Radio Personality. My show, In My Humble Opinion, aired on RainbowRadio from 2015-2017.

Feel free to contact me at niceguy9418@usa.com. You can also friend me on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, and Tumblr, and support my Patreon. Also, if you don't mind the stench, you can find my unofficial "fan club" over HERE. ;)


Monday, August 23, 2010

A couple of articles

I came by all three of these articles by way of Professor Bob Carroll, over on Skepdic.com.  Thanks Bob!

Did you know that brainless yellow mold/slime makes certain decisions pretty much the same way humans do?

Seriously.  Check it out.  I think this is a good example as to why the free market doesn't function in the near-perfect manner that those with a nigh religious belief in it claim it should: Because people are mostly stupid, irrational, easily duped and willing to put up with a lot of shenanigans in the name of inertia and convenience!  Sadly, this statement spills over into politics as well, but that's another post.

Shifting gears....

Here's yet another article demolishing a pseudo scientific claim being made by a non-doctor, based on (scant) anecdotal evidence.  Bottom line: Stick to science, folks.  Just because "Doctors" can't "cure" something, that should not be licence for us to go out and "try anything," giving our hard earned money to these charlatans.  And we see this a LOT, don't we?  What's the latest weight-loss fad? Accai Berry?  *roll eyes*

Ironically, considering the article I just put up, do you know the BEST way to lose weight is?  A LOW-CARB DIET!  Take it from me: It works.  (Roll your eyes at my cheesy irony... NOW.)

(Just don't knock the Atkins Diet on THIS blog - because, take it from me: IT WORKS!) LOL

And as for things that "Doctor's can't cure" HERE'S why you needn't bother "trying anything."
There's a very good chance someone's already looked at it, and it didn't work.  See... there IS a "bias" in publication, but it's not to suppress "alternative medicine." It's to publish things THAT WORK.  When a remedy is shown to be useless, those results tend to just get filed away.  Unfortunately, that's used as evidence by homeopaths, acupuncturists, nutritionists and other charlatans  to claim that "Medicine" is not looking into those things because of some profit-based conspiracy.  In a word? BULLSHIT. 

If "alternative medicine" was worth a damn, it would be called "MEDICINE."


  1. Eddie;
    I just had to post on this, because one of my pet-peeves is fad diets.
    The 'secret' of weight-loss, generally, is consuming fewer calories than you expend. The consensus among doctors that I've talked to is that the best way to do this is to eat (in moderation) a well-balanced diet and exercise.
    The problem that I see with most fad diets is that they sacrifice balance. For example, on a low or no-fat diet, you could eat a 50 lb. bag of sugar - or on a low or no-carb diet, you could eat a 50 lb. can of lard. In both cases you are within the parameters of the diet, but it's not very healthy. The human body developed a taste for fats and sugars because those two nutrients provided the highest per unit caloric value. Marketing, especially snack and fast-food marketing have taken advantage of these factors with products that mislead the consumer, i.e.; 'low-fat' products that are high in sugar, and 'low-carb' products that are high in fat. (And don't get me started on salt!) (Last moment note: this also ties-in with your observation that _un-healthy_ food is cheaper than healthier alternatives.)
    My point is that if you sacrifice protein, starches, or fiber you will likely lose weight - because your body is suffering malnutrition, leading to 'yo-yo' weight fluctuations.
    This is not to say that people can't have a positive weight-loss experience with these diets. My brother-in-law and I both did well on a low-carb diet, and he did a much better job of keeping the weight off. I, on the other hand, felt that i was sacrificing too much.
    My wife is currently on Weight-Watchers (which I believe to be a fantastic program for folks that benefit from having a support group,) and doing extremely well. She has helped me make better choices about what and how much I eat, and I, in turn, have gotten her involved at the gym my employer sponsors.
    Sorry, I guess an eye-roll would have saved me a lot of typing.
    (Disclosure: I am overweight. When I was discharged from the Army I was fit, active, and had a healthy appetite - guess which two I gave up... ;) )

  2. Eddie, I have always always always been thin/lean. I gained a bunch of weight on purpose by lifting weights and eating tons and tons of food. But I didn't like my ab region, so I started changing my protein/carb ratio to high protein/low carb. I didn't realize it, but I lost 25 lbs that I hadn't intended on losing. I only wanted the washboards. You're right. Low carb works. So now I just eat more, but it's all protein, so I can get some of the weight back.

  3. Okie,

    Your statement:

    "on a low or no-fat diet, you could eat a 50 lb. bag of sugar - or on a low or no-carb diet, you could eat a 50 lb. can of lard. In both cases you are within the parameters of the diet"

    ...is simply, flat-out false. That's a big-time misrepresentation of the Atkins Diet. That may be how the media represents it, but it's flat out FALSE.

    50 POUNDS of fat would have WAY more calories than 50 POUNDS of Sugar. And the whole idea is that you DO reduce calories because (1) an equal 'weight' of fat is disproportionately more FILLING (calorically) than the equal weight in sugar, and (2) doesn't spike your blood sugar and thus doesn't cause the resulting insulin drop which (1) is how you form body fat and (2) makes you feel hungry again. You only "eat as much as you want" for a day or two on Atkins, because after that you feel full all the time. The result is that you DO consume fewer calories, and the ones you do consume do not convert so quickly to body fat. It maintains your blood sugar at a slightly below normal level, causing your body to burn its own fat instead. Kind of like starvation, but without the vitamin deficiency.

    BTW... You don't cut out fiber. Fiber is like 'free carbs' and does not count towards your limit. All you cut out is sugars, starches and refined flour; which basically means: bread, rice, potatoes and "junk food." (OK, and fruit for the first two weeks, but I never eat fruit anyway. Just not my thing. So I don't personally lose anything there, marginally speaking!)

    What's more, studies have been done (one by Stanford comes to mind) to try and prove that the diet is unhealthy - that it's bad for your heart. The one I'm thinking of was published back in 2003, at the height of the Atkins craze. When compared to a low-calorie, but otherwise balanced diet, not only did the Atkins group lose MORE weight, but their blood pressure, Cholesterol, Triglycerides and other heart-related metric not only IMPROVED but improved MORE that the control (calorie restricted) group.

    As a DIET, Atkins is NOT a fad. There's four decades of science and peer review behind it. It became a FAD in 2002~2003, but it was only a fad as a BUSINESS. And the BUSINESS didn't fail because the diet didn't work, only because the trendiness wore out. Which again - didn't happen because it doesn't work, or because it was "disproven" or shown to be unhealthy. Merely because people who diet tend not to stick to any, so they bounce from one to the other. The fact that it reached the heights it DID might speak to its effectiveness, but I'll still defer to science. (Such as Stanford's.)

    Now... I don't disagree that "calories in < calories out" is a BETTER formula. But if I could do THAT, the OI wouldn't need to lose weight now, would I? ;)

    But do you really want to know what the BEST diet is? ONE YOU CAN STICK TO. If weight watchers works for your wife? If the gym works for you? Hey, that's great. Congratulations. Personally? Sloth and Gluttony are my two biggest sins. (Followed closely by Pride, if you haven't picked up on that yet!) So abstinence and exercise just ain't going to happen in sufficient balance to one another. So just being realistic: It wouldn't work for me. ('Cause I wouldn't DO it. LOL)

    In any case, that bit was intended a bit ironically anyway, because the whole point was that you SHOULD NOT take ANY medical advice based on anecdotal evidence. So my personal endorsement of the Atkins diet was meant to be a bit of a joke...

    ...but it does work! And it's not unhealthy if you really understand it. What most people think of when they think 'low carb diet' is NOT what Dr. Atkins was actually recommending.

    Thanks for your comment.

  4. Sammy,

    Fuck you and your 'washboard abs!'

    LOL, I'm so kidding! LOL.

    Oh yeah, you'll lose weight all right. And after, with all the protein and weight-lifting, the weight you DO gain back will be 99% muscle, assuming you're still limiting sugar intake.

    (Just remember, in reading what I just wrote, that 67.8% of all statistics are made up on the spot!)

    Thanks for your comment.

  5. I'm so sweet, I just lick my own skin for my sugar intake. ;)

  6. Oh, and I *want* washboard abs; I don't quite *have* them. Big difference.