Posts by darkbison81

Kenneth Hernandez67 said:Can I just say how adorable this little group of smart girls is?😍

You’re basically the cherry on top here.😁

Jose Miller3 said:Are you talking about those giveaways again?

Honestly, thinking about it now, I’d definitely bring some Milka 🙂
with me this summer, because you just can't find any decent Milka here in the States...

violent_femmes9 said:but let's be real, biologists only get the short end of the stick because they traditionally look way better than chemists😁

Whatever, man. That’s just propaganda meant to make us feel better about ourselves.😢

Jose Miller3 said:Man, whenever someone drops this emoji on me, I honestly just run out of things to say... all I can think about is some other emoji where one person is just tenderly stroking another's head... 😁

I know you're a sucker for this one; I remember getting this exact little smiley as a gift once. 😍 😘

Jose Miller3 said:Man, I really outdid myself with that level of stupidity. 🙂
I don't have any issues with her at all! 😁

So what's my problem then? I actually happen to be perfectly fine with who I am. 🙂

Jose Miller3 said:Go ahead and take all the pride you can get out of that...

Here we go again with the bitterness. 😁 Honestly, there’s nothing worse than someone who is completely unapologetic about their own stupidity. 😬

Frank Alvarez8 said:👋

Honestly, forget about it. I know some old-school math professors who basically use chemical concentrations as their standard unit of measurement. 😬 To them, biologists were always just completely off the charts. 😁

Anthony Harris14 said:Me? Really?😕 😬

Look, I've already laid this all out for you before.😁

Anthony Harris14 said:My go-to chemistry expert is darkbison81😍

I don't know, I'm a little suspicious of you; you sound way too reasonable sometimes😍

Jose Miller3 said:So what, you trying to tell me you're some kind of chemist?

Haha, if that's the case, then I guess I'm a biologist too. 😎

You know how that classic academic gradualism works:
dumb, dumber, biologist. 😬

rustymoose54 said:Hey 😍

If you happened—and I mean purely by chance—to be thinking of me, then what you’re calling "patience" is actually just pure EGO. 😉

Funny how you all suddenly became this squad of incredibly patient people (including that bitter Jose Miller3, you, the little guy, and I'll probably throw Kemik in there too). From what I know about you lot, your egos aren't even that massive.🙂 😉

Jose Miller3 said:she isn't even remotely a chemist...

Are we really going to go there now? 😁

Jose Miller3 said:Where can you even find people like that? 😁

The only ones I ever run into 😁 and honestly, their patience is unreal 🙂

Jose Miller3 said:The people mistybear4 is aiming his posts at don't even know what mat & met is, let alone how to actually interpret an original scientific paper!

Look, I just say what interests ME. When I want to fact-check something or dig for specific details, I ask. I also make sure to remind everyone that just because something is reported doesn't mean it's exactly what the scientist actually discovered or published. Plus, I point out that there are all kinds of scientists out there, and frankly, any old thing can get published these days...

How someone chooses to handle information—whether they analyze it themselves, seek help, blindly believe it, or dismiss it outright—is entirely their own business.
At least we have some well-meaning chemists here 😉 who would be more than happy to help anyone interested evaluate whether a study is actually legit. 🙂

Hannah Davis18 said:It totally reminds me of those old donut commercials from the 80s.
You know the ones—someone walking across the ground, crumbling it with their hands while some narrator tells you there's less and less magnesium left in the soil.

So what, are we supposed to just start eating dirt now? 🤔
How on earth do you even remember stuff like that? 😁

Anthony Harris14 said:I just heard that somewhere; I have no idea if there's actually any real research backing it up.

Exactly. That’s precisely why I insist on digging up the original study myself. When you're just dealing with secondhand information, things get "skewed" or completely misinterpreted.
I won't say that when you read the actual paper, you get a much better look at the mat & met (it's a hell of a thing, honestly 🙂), but more than anything, I love getting into the discussion sections 🙂

Only then do you really grasp what kind of data you're holding and what you can actually do with it. 🙂

mistybear4 said:David Heber
Louis Ignarro

Wait, is this the same David:
UCLA Center for Human Nutrition, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California-Los Angeles

The Ignarro I’m familiar with—you know, the guy who does all that work on nitric oxide signaling? I can't recall the specific colleague's name right now, but his stuff is all over PubMed 😵—doesn't really focus on nutrition research...

But whatever, it doesn't matter much.

mistybear4 said:darkbison81, I’m actually hunting down the original paper right now. As soon as I track it down, I’ll shoot it over to you... 🙂

I don't need photos, but thanks for the offer. I'd definitely take a PDF of the article though, especially if it's in some journal that isn't easy for me to access. 🙂

mistybear4 said:Studies out of Germany

I'd love to track down the original paper. Could someone drop a link or a formal reference? Thanks. 🙂

Black Knights said:Read up on why so-called Diet Coke isn't actually bad for youhere
.

To quote the link provided above:
"There are more carcinogens in grilled steak, raw parsley, or even parsnips than in any of the substances mentioned in this article. So what? Aspartame critics love to scream that the stuff in Diet Coke is hepatotoxic because its breakdown releases methanol. What they conveniently forget to mention is that a person would have to chug somewhere between 200 and 400 liters of Diet Coke ALL AT ONCE just to reach a marginally (not even lethally) toxic level of methanol. Under normal consumption levels, the amounts are steadily oxidized by the liver without any proven harmful effects. As for those three writers over at The New York Times claiming the concept of dosage is outdated—you can save that logic for people who believe in homeopathy; they’re the ones who will actually buy it. And as for 'timing and synergism' involving every imaginable variable—if we panicked over everything that could only be harmful under an extremely specific set of circumstances, I don't think you'd find anything in a grocery store or out in a field that wouldn't trigger some catastrophic scenario."