Honestly, that sounds way too good to be true. I'd love to see something about the metabolic pathways that explain how replacing such a small amount of feed could lead to 90% reduction in methane.

This screams for a LOT of replication (and explanation) before anyone gets too excited about it.

Interesting video, though.

So if you synthesize your own through exposure to sunlight, you’re good? Or at least better off?
Is it possible that it’s not the delivery method, but the systems that use vitamin D being healthy beforehand vs being supplemented after the fact? Maybe it takes a while to get those systems healthy, and supplements don’t help with that.

Edit: Maybe, since the same receptors are used to metabolize vitamin D as to infect a cell with covid, those receptors being “full” might be what’s stopping infections, and dosing with vitamin D after infection doesn’t magically replace the Covid with vitamin D? Not really about vitamin D or why you need it, just about the mechanism the body uses to use the vitamin D? Biology is intricate, and why things work and how is not always clean and simple.

Melatonin? Then why aren’t people with more melatonin, people of color, nearly immune? Why are island nations like the Virgin Islands still having outbreaks today? Why were Southern states hit just as hard or harder than northern states? Many questions here.

His explanation seems to confirm this. If your cells produce vitamin D efficiently, they are less prone to infections, if you artificially add artificial vitamin D, it helps with the cellular functions, but the processes that should be producing it are still suppressed, possibly more because your body isn’t triggering them due to low vitamin D levels. It’s less about overall vitamin D levels than about having healthy systems that properly produce and utilize it….at least that’s my takeaway.

It’s not just about sunlight..it’s about diet, overall health, sleep, etc. biology is complex, and we always want a simple solution. There isn’t one most of the time, and our attempts to simplify only make things worse. Eat well, sleep well, get some sun, get some exercise, and you’ll be as safe as you can be naturally….then try supplements in addition, not instead.

I get plenty of sun, and my windows are from the 50’s. It definitely makes me feel better to get sun, but there’s a limit. Don’t just go sunbathe in Arizona, use your brain.

That would be amazing.
I look forward to understanding what the heck happened.

Hysterical reaction?

On the tox screen; that stuff is funny. I think the reason Anesthesia likes it is its super short half life --so--I hope someone thought to get samples before it (maybe?) got metabolized....

"Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid with µ-agonist pharmacologic effects. After intravenous injection, fentanyl plasma concentrations fall rapidly, with sequential distribution half-lives of about 1 minute and 18 minutes, and a terminal elimination half-life of 475 minutes."

Hmm. I guess it isn't flapping nonstop for an extended period of time, but I'm still surprised that an invertebrate has the metabolism to expend the amount of energy it would require to flap/fly like that... Cool.

I'm normally a big fan of Occam's Razor, but this is one of those questions that demonstrate why it's a rule-of-thumb, rather than a law. As the study that @transmorpher linked to shows, there appears to be a serious degree of homeostasis in the human metabolism. In short, the simple explanations just don't explain the observations.

There are actually a couple of other happiness-increasing technique that is somewhat non-intuitive, is shown to increase happiness in repeated studies, and is fairly easy to implement and difficult to reverse: Having a dog or cat.

It appears that being needed by the animal makes the human feel as if they have intrinsic value which...I mean it would be nice if we had that without pets but, there it is. If you want the best bang for your buck, I would suggest a small dog or cat from the pound as it will eat significantly less food than a bigger animal.

Another life change that actually effectively increases long-term happiness on average is marriage. This seemed a little too hairy for this video though. Also, DEFINITELY NOT DOSE-DEPENDENT. One spouse...better for happiness. Two spouses USUALLY NOT.

So there you go...get a pet, get hitched, and shorten your commute. You need to get home anyway, so you can feed your dog!

SOURCES:
Homeownership doesn't increase happiness: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/14/realestate/homeownership-the-key-to-happiness.html?_r=0
Short Commute = $40,000 raise
http://www.npr.org/2011/10/19/141514467/small-changes-can-help-you-thrive-happily
Commuting Linked to Lower Life Satisfaction
https://uwaterloo.ca/recreation-and-l...

Commuting and Metabolic / Cardiovascular Health
https://uwaterloo.ca/recreation-and-leisure-studies/crunched-time-commuting-linked-lower-life-satisfaction

Commuting related to lower social activity and lower general trust
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4509867/

10 Things Commuting Does to your Body
http://time.com/9912/10-things-your-commute-does-to-your-body/

I don't recall anyone claiming the path to losing weight is exercise alone. This video is based on a straw man argument.

It's just as irresponsible to claim that exercise plays no significant part in weight loss. There just aren't definitive results yet from studies of how exercise affects metabolism. So we can't draw conclusions.

So what's the purpose of this video? There's a message at the end that we need to push politicians on food policy. So does this video provide biased interpretation for a political agenda? Maybe I was wrong on that count. But then, what IS the point of this video? They can't be trying to convince people to lose weight from diet alone. There is no reasonable study that makes that conclusion.

Maybe it's a clickbait video. What it is not, is a reasonable analysis of the available data. Because any reasonable analysis says, "we don't know yet, so diet AND exercise."

But I agree about HIIT. It is personally the only way I can stay at a healthy weight. Along with careful nutrition.

At 1:43 the conclusion made from the graph is "5lbs at most" when the graph shows a different story. Those blue shadows on either side of the line show some kind of uncertainty whether it be best case and worst case scenarios or margin for errors.

I know that sounds like nitpicking, but it'd be like someone saying they love cars and know all about them, but when you ask what their favourite type of car is they say "red ones". It presents itself as scientific but then makes a high school level scientific mistake that just scratches at the surface of credibility.

[calories in] - [calories out] = [net calories absorbed or lost]

Calories are directly proportional to mass or weight. If you burn more than you ingest then you lose weight, it is unavoidable. The "best" way to lose weight is to be negative in the above sum, either by increasing your energy expenditure (exercise) or decreasing your energy intake (food). And of course the body needs essential vitamins and whatnot to function and remain healthy.

I have a friend who took tablets to increase his resting metabolism. He lost weight, but also sweated profusely, had a high heart rate that worried him and regained the weight straight after coming off them.

The only thing I know for certain is that the entire science of metabolism is much more complicated than a 5 minute video that's pushing a political agenda.

The truth is that all the research has proven nothing yet about the push/pull of calories, exercise and metabolism. Dumbing down the science and presenting half the facts with a biased, attention grabbing headline does nothing to illuminate the subject.

I wonder what the effect of plastic particles will be on them. I was thinking they may be screwed by the sheer amount, but maybe the low metabolic rates may do something about that?

It's a neat creature, and one that can survive in the growing oxygen free zones in the ocean.

Maybe life has found a way with this thing. =)

Yeah, I hardly ate breakfast for a decade just because I didn't have the time between crunching sleep and getting to work, then my metabolism just evolved.

I think this is the reason that eggs. sausage, hash browns, bacon & toast make me excited since rarely have the time to eat em.

ya, sort of. Way over simplified. For example, drinking orange juice is not a ton of calories, but all that sugar in your bloodstream spikes your insulin response and you suddenly become an efficient fat storing machine. (unless you just did a heavy workout in which case you become a muscle building machine if paired with protein.)

Also, when you work out correctly your base metabolism will be WAY faster than before, and calorie counting really doesn't matter much at that point. Only thing that matters is the quality and composition of the food. Low/no sugar, equal proportions of protein/fat/unrefined carbs. etc.


Also,

Love the Conan cameo! King of creepy;)

That's quite the story to share, I commend your courage to type it out here. Bravo!

My personal story has similar details, but in a kind of strange reversal.

I just turned 30. I have an athletic/skinny build. My metabolism is such that I could eat fast food almost every meal and not become overweight, although that will surely change, and doesn't mean the other ill effects of fast food don't harm me. I have no allergies, no diseases, I've never even broken a bone.

But on multiple occasions I've sat in the dark alone, 911 predialed on my smartphone, fingers on my pulse, wondering if it was the moment I'd finally gone too far with the amphetamines.

I've had a physical since; doctor said I was healthy as a horse.

But I still fear the toll it took, that if I exercise too vigorously or have wild enough sex, my heart will just explode.

I suppose there's worse ways to go out.

I'm overweight, had a heart attack 9 years ago when I was 30. I'm on low sodium diet, have 2 cordis brand stints in my chest. Grade 1 diastolic dysfunction from a little scar tissue on left ventricle.

I had severe depression and the heart attack at 30 messed my head up fierce in my thinking. First off I've never had a physical before then and I've never been sick. When my parents caught flus and I didn't they had me tested and I was a 1 in 10 or 100 thousand I forget that are immune to flu. Once a year I donate blood here in Ga that is sent to Emory in Atlanta I get paid $350 for my blood once a year.

But back to heart attack since I never had physical due to never sick I knew I was not eating healthy and used to smoke and nicotine is a vascular constrictor. It triggered the attack and was my last cigarette. It scared the addiction out of me and never had withdrawals.

But my severe mental depression although obese I became scared to eat, I went on starvation diet. I'd drink water but no food at all.

After 5th day I was so weak I couldn't move. Later I realized it takes a lot of calories to move my fatass. But I had a new danger that almost triggered cardiac arrest.

I live alone and was able to crawl to phone and call 911. They first thought it was another heart attack but heart was slowed but no problems. They did blood test and took 7 vials. About 6 hours later was the embarrassment.

Doctor came in, along with psychiatrist, nutritionist, and another counselor. I was hypokalemic. Which means potassium was dangerously low almost fatally low. Which was red flag for usually the stereotypical teenage girl with anorexia.

Took 2 IV bags of riggers lactate, shot of potassium, a little amphetamine to boost blood pressure up to normal and 24 hour observation on regular saline IV.

I still have severe depression due to weight. I have degenerative disc disease in my back so I can't get around very good. My diet is set at 1800 calories yet my I only lose 1 to 2 pounds a month. Extensive testing has shown my metabolism has come to a stop. So even though I eat very little calories and low sodium protein diet with barely any carbs with no metabolism the body only stores it as fat because at zero metabolism the body thinks it has to store instead of burn thinking its starving but its not.

But my cardiologist and general doc are trying an extremely dangerous and risky treatment to try and JumpStart my metabolism. I have to record my blood pressure hourly and go in once a week for ekg and blood enzyme test but they are using a drug not made for this as "off label" use and you aren't supposed to even use it with heart disease but that's the strict monitoring by both my doctors. The controversy is they are using adderall to force my metabolism up. Your body is forced to burn through energy stored, and the idea is once my metabolism kicks back in it should stay up on its own.

Tests look promising its my second week on it and I was averaging 1-2 sometimes 3 pound loss in one month. Now since the low dose adderall trial I lost 5 pounds in 1 week!!!

And that little victory has done wonders for my severe depression. I've actually got hope.

Howdy - sorry for the delay, was traveling on business. The issue you are referring to below with regards to reusable water bottles is I believe related to the type of liner (thin coating of polymer based material that is coated on the inside of some but not all of these bottles). In most cases when polymers come in contact with food (incl. water) the concerns are usually not in the polymer itself, but in some of the additives (processing aids, plasticizers, anti-oxidants, UV stabilizers, pigments etc) that in some cases have negative impacts on some human metabolic processes. I would emphasize 'some'. The recent outrage over BPA is not supported unequivocally by scientific evidence, but there is enough uncertainty to move away from it as a plasticizer in PET bottles. If one was to use a food grade polyethylene or polypropylene water bottle, requiring no liner, and totally suitable as a water bottle, then there is no concern at all with the long term use of this material in water bottles. Next time you go through the grocery store, have a look at all the packaging - films on processed meets, stretch wrap on fresh meat cuts, all of your cold dairy products - the vast majority of these are made from one of either polyethylene or polypropylene, with a smattering of polystyrene and polyvinylidene chloride thrown in. All perfectly safe.

As for how the balls are made - these are blow molded. If you have a look at the plastic baseballs made for kids that come with a big fat plastic bat (or really any hard plastic ball that you might find at Wal Mart or Toys'R'Us, you'll see the small ridge that runs equatorially around the circumference of the ball (that's the parting line where the two mold halves come together) and somewhere on that line there will be either a little tiny hole or a small protruding knob that used to be the parison where the air was injected into the small plastic glob forcing it to the walls of the mold like an expanding balloon. This is the same type of molding that makes your liquid dishwashing detergent bottle, plastic ketchup and mustard containers, and plastic milk jugs. Hope this helps a bit. cheers