Go Ahead, Eat Ice Cream for Dinner
July 26, 2018 1:03 PM Subscribe
The Vindication of Cheese, Butter, and Full-Fat Milk. A new study exonerates dairy fats as a cause of early death, even as low-fat products continue to be misperceived as healthier. "The researchers also found that certain saturated fatty acids may have specific benefits for some people. High levels of heptadecanoic acid, for example, were associated with lower rates of strokes."
This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- frimble
My friend as a nutrition science major is the embodiment of the 🤷🏻‍♀️ emoji. Just eat your food in moderation and look to how other countries eat to get some perspective, like we need for all of our lives.
posted by yueliang at 1:19 PM on July 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by yueliang at 1:19 PM on July 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
I'm starting to think that stressing over what to eat is the real killer. Anyway, off to have some mayonnaise ice cream.
posted by duffell at 1:31 PM on July 26, 2018 [21 favorites]
posted by duffell at 1:31 PM on July 26, 2018 [21 favorites]
Everything in moderation. Including moderation.
posted by biscotti at 1:33 PM on July 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
posted by biscotti at 1:33 PM on July 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
I am just about DONE with reading any more advice on what foods are healthier or less healthy. Health advice is starting to become like the weather: just wait a bit and it will change.
A - fucking - men.
I resent having grown up on skim milk, being told not to eat eggs, and for love of god, every fake ice cream product ever shilled in the name of guilt.
posted by Dashy at 1:34 PM on July 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
A - fucking - men.
I resent having grown up on skim milk, being told not to eat eggs, and for love of god, every fake ice cream product ever shilled in the name of guilt.
posted by Dashy at 1:34 PM on July 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
greetings mefites
a strange advice
the only winning move is not to listenposted by grumpybear69 at 1:34 PM on July 26, 2018 [26 favorites]
I'm hoping this is unlike the other recent study on dairy which was funded by the dairy industry.
Dairy Industry Funds Research Saying Dairy Is Good For Us
Not saying dairy is good or bad, but after years of U.S. "research" saying this or that food is bad or good, I'm highly skeptical of many studies like this.
posted by neeta at 1:35 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
Dairy Industry Funds Research Saying Dairy Is Good For Us
Not saying dairy is good or bad, but after years of U.S. "research" saying this or that food is bad or good, I'm highly skeptical of many studies like this.
posted by neeta at 1:35 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
Ya know, I am just about DONE with reading any more advice on what foods are healthier or less healthy.
Indeed, Michael Pollan's pithy advice is the only thing worth heeding: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”
posted by tobascodagama at 1:42 PM on July 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
Indeed, Michael Pollan's pithy advice is the only thing worth heeding: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”
posted by tobascodagama at 1:42 PM on July 26, 2018 [10 favorites]
duffell: off to have some mayonnaise ice cream
You're bringing some to the meetup, right?
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 1:46 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
You're bringing some to the meetup, right?
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 1:46 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
Ya know, I am just about DONE with reading any more advice on what foods are healthier or less healthy. Health advice is starting to become like the weather: just wait a bit and it will change.
You're not wrong. This is not just one failure, it's a cascade, and there are many who need to do better in order for things to improve.
First, it's a really hard problem. The factors that affect heath is not hugely well understood, in part because "health" is a very wide category. Might interfere with each other, and might not.
Secondly, a lot of science is bad. I review a lot of papers, and at least a quarter of them aren't worth the money to print out a pdf. Another quarter are just wrong, bad interpretations of data, bad data, and bad design in the first place. Then there's the whole nearly entirely bad faith games that happen with significance.
Thirdly, science writing is really hard and has some really terrible pathologies. It too often insists on certainty, has little to no critical context (compared to other studies, for example), and almost never includes any discussion of uncertainty or levels of significance.
So, through this broken set of processes, it's a wonder decent information leaks out the end at all. It takes hard work on the science, and hard work on the communication between scientist and journalist, and finally excellent work by the journalist for that to happen. I've seen it happen both very badly and very well; getting it right is really hard and expensive. It's no wonder that stuff that ends up on the nightly news as "scientists say..." is often the result of strip-mine scientists chasing faddish grants, over-enthusiastic institutional pr people and rushed and uneducated reporters.
posted by bonehead at 1:52 PM on July 26, 2018 [21 favorites]
You're not wrong. This is not just one failure, it's a cascade, and there are many who need to do better in order for things to improve.
First, it's a really hard problem. The factors that affect heath is not hugely well understood, in part because "health" is a very wide category. Might interfere with each other, and might not.
Secondly, a lot of science is bad. I review a lot of papers, and at least a quarter of them aren't worth the money to print out a pdf. Another quarter are just wrong, bad interpretations of data, bad data, and bad design in the first place. Then there's the whole nearly entirely bad faith games that happen with significance.
Thirdly, science writing is really hard and has some really terrible pathologies. It too often insists on certainty, has little to no critical context (compared to other studies, for example), and almost never includes any discussion of uncertainty or levels of significance.
So, through this broken set of processes, it's a wonder decent information leaks out the end at all. It takes hard work on the science, and hard work on the communication between scientist and journalist, and finally excellent work by the journalist for that to happen. I've seen it happen both very badly and very well; getting it right is really hard and expensive. It's no wonder that stuff that ends up on the nightly news as "scientists say..." is often the result of strip-mine scientists chasing faddish grants, over-enthusiastic institutional pr people and rushed and uneducated reporters.
posted by bonehead at 1:52 PM on July 26, 2018 [21 favorites]
off to have some mayonnaise ice cream
You're bringing some to the meetup, right?
Only if someone fashions a waffle cone out of french fries. I don't want to play this game anymore
posted by duffell at 1:58 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
You're bringing some to the meetup, right?
posted by duffell at 1:58 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
Ya know, I am just about DONE with reading any more advice on what foods are healthier or less healthy. Health advice is starting to become like the weather: just wait a bit and it will change.
Perhaps relatedly: dietary self report is problematic.
posted by eirias at 2:00 PM on July 26, 2018 [2 favorites]
Perhaps relatedly: dietary self report is problematic.
posted by eirias at 2:00 PM on July 26, 2018 [2 favorites]
I've been saying for years that the sugar people sub in to make low-fat tastier is much, much worse than real dairy consumed in moderation. No food is "unhealthy," ffs, unless it's actually toxic or rotten. The obesity crisis is caused by lack of access to food made from real ingredients, lack of public transportation discouraging pedestrianism, and the general emotional/social overload of living as a not-wealthy person in America.
We've been obsessing about the morality of food since Good Queen Bess and probably further, it's time to Stop.
posted by a power-tie-wearing she-capitalist at 2:17 PM on July 26, 2018 [13 favorites]
We've been obsessing about the morality of food since Good Queen Bess and probably further, it's time to Stop.
posted by a power-tie-wearing she-capitalist at 2:17 PM on July 26, 2018 [13 favorites]
The obesity crisis is caused by
I'd also add that it's further fueled by disordered eating due to unrealistic perceptions of body image and anxiety about what 'eating healthy' entails.
posted by politikitty at 2:27 PM on July 26, 2018 [15 favorites]
I'd also add that it's further fueled by disordered eating due to unrealistic perceptions of body image and anxiety about what 'eating healthy' entails.
posted by politikitty at 2:27 PM on July 26, 2018 [15 favorites]
Summary of all "healthy food writing":
"We think we may have adjusted this one unlabeled dial on a machine that composed of 8 quadrillion dials. We think (maybe?) it did something good/bad."
Everyone wants something simple. The answer is mind-boggling complicated, and yet, if you squint, it does seem that Pollan's advice ("Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.") and that of Oscar Wilde ("Everything in moderation; even moderation.") will lead to the best outcomes.
posted by petrilli at 2:42 PM on July 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
"We think we may have adjusted this one unlabeled dial on a machine that composed of 8 quadrillion dials. We think (maybe?) it did something good/bad."
Everyone wants something simple. The answer is mind-boggling complicated, and yet, if you squint, it does seem that Pollan's advice ("Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.") and that of Oscar Wilde ("Everything in moderation; even moderation.") will lead to the best outcomes.
posted by petrilli at 2:42 PM on July 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
It's tempting to blame declining faith in experts on Trump or Fox News, but I would trace it to the early 2000's. When nutrition experts doubled down on low-fat diets in the face of growing evidence that their recommendations didn't hold up to scrutiny. And when just about every mainstream economist missed the housing bubble. I think that these are two of the biggest factors in the erosion of trust in scientific and academic authorities, and we're going to be dealing with the consequences for a long time.
posted by Ralston McTodd at 3:02 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by Ralston McTodd at 3:02 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
I will assume that adding chocolate to some of the fatty products will enhance the life extension properties, and pleasure.
posted by sammyo at 3:10 PM on July 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
posted by sammyo at 3:10 PM on July 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
First, it's a really hard problem. The factors that affect heath is not hugely well understood, in part because "health" is a very wide category. Might interfere with each other, and might not.
Secondly, a lot of science is bad. I review a lot of papers, and at least a quarter of them aren't worth the money to print out a pdf. Another quarter are just wrong, bad interpretations of data, bad data, and bad design in the first place. Then there's the whole nearly entirely bad faith games that happen with significance.
I'm not an expert here, and maybe this is point one and a half, but not only is the output "health" hard to measure, but the input dietary behaviour is really hard to actually measure. Like, if you get together 50 people with a rash, you can rub an ointment on the rash twice a day for a week and see if it clears up or not. But with diet, there are a ton of issues.
If you wanted to test if butter was healthy, the ideal is take 500 people and half of them eat butter and half of them placebo butter for 30 years and then measure their health. But that doesn't work, because eating only one thing -- no matter the thing -- is not healthy or possible. So the next best thing is get 500 people and half of them eat a Standard Diet plus butter, and half the SD plus placebo butter for 30 years, but that costs millions of dollars plus people don't want to stay on the plan.
You can go down various levels of complications, until what you can actually accomplish reasonably are compromises:
- Looking at a proxy measure that is associated with health (eg cholesterol) but that introduces another step of uncertainty and many health conditions don't have a proxy or the proxy is only vaguely related.
- Looking at response to a controlled diet over a short period of time, hope it lasts in the real world. (and you'd be measuring a proxy; it's not like you can make people eat something for two weeks to see if they get colon cancer because colon cancer doesn't happen in two weeks)
- Trying to get people to eat a specific diet in a study, which is hard because nobody can follow a diet perfectly and the longer and/or more specific it is, the harder that gets.
- Asking about food consumption patterns, which is problematic because people's memories aren't great, people don't know what they eat (I went to a restaurant last night and had Cha Cá in the style of Cha Cá Lã Vong; have fun finding that in Standard Nutritional Table) and people's diet can vary a ton, in the short term (I had roast beef on Sunday and leftover roast beef on Monday and Tuesday, implied annual beef consumption infinity), in the medium term (I've eaten more cherries in the last month than the previous 10 because July is cherry season), in the long term (in the 80s sushi was a punchline - ew, raw fish? - now it's comfort food).
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 3:26 PM on July 26, 2018 [11 favorites]
Secondly, a lot of science is bad. I review a lot of papers, and at least a quarter of them aren't worth the money to print out a pdf. Another quarter are just wrong, bad interpretations of data, bad data, and bad design in the first place. Then there's the whole nearly entirely bad faith games that happen with significance.
I'm not an expert here, and maybe this is point one and a half, but not only is the output "health" hard to measure, but the input dietary behaviour is really hard to actually measure. Like, if you get together 50 people with a rash, you can rub an ointment on the rash twice a day for a week and see if it clears up or not. But with diet, there are a ton of issues.
If you wanted to test if butter was healthy, the ideal is take 500 people and half of them eat butter and half of them placebo butter for 30 years and then measure their health. But that doesn't work, because eating only one thing -- no matter the thing -- is not healthy or possible. So the next best thing is get 500 people and half of them eat a Standard Diet plus butter, and half the SD plus placebo butter for 30 years, but that costs millions of dollars plus people don't want to stay on the plan.
You can go down various levels of complications, until what you can actually accomplish reasonably are compromises:
- Looking at a proxy measure that is associated with health (eg cholesterol) but that introduces another step of uncertainty and many health conditions don't have a proxy or the proxy is only vaguely related.
- Looking at response to a controlled diet over a short period of time, hope it lasts in the real world. (and you'd be measuring a proxy; it's not like you can make people eat something for two weeks to see if they get colon cancer because colon cancer doesn't happen in two weeks)
- Trying to get people to eat a specific diet in a study, which is hard because nobody can follow a diet perfectly and the longer and/or more specific it is, the harder that gets.
- Asking about food consumption patterns, which is problematic because people's memories aren't great, people don't know what they eat (I went to a restaurant last night and had Cha Cá in the style of Cha Cá Lã Vong; have fun finding that in Standard Nutritional Table) and people's diet can vary a ton, in the short term (I had roast beef on Sunday and leftover roast beef on Monday and Tuesday, implied annual beef consumption infinity), in the medium term (I've eaten more cherries in the last month than the previous 10 because July is cherry season), in the long term (in the 80s sushi was a punchline - ew, raw fish? - now it's comfort food).
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 3:26 PM on July 26, 2018 [11 favorites]
I know what it means to be talking out of one's ass scientifically vis a vis metabolism, fitness, and diet, and believe me, almost everyone is.
Cutting back on dairy would probably help alleviate that.
posted by Greg_Ace at 3:48 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
Cutting back on dairy would probably help alleviate that.
posted by Greg_Ace at 3:48 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
IMO, dairy is healthy, but the crap they feed* dairy animals and the additives they put into the containers isn't all that good for you.
*except grass
Natural Grass, now enhanced with herbicides and pesticides.
posted by BlueHorse at 3:50 PM on July 26, 2018
*except grass
Natural Grass, now enhanced with herbicides and pesticides.
posted by BlueHorse at 3:50 PM on July 26, 2018
I've said it a few times lately in real life though haven't said it here, but if I could go back in time and change one small thing, I'd do whatever it takes to get Ancel Keys out of dietary research sometime after 1950 but before 1955.
The amount of human suffering that man caused is incalculable.
posted by monopas at 4:12 PM on July 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
The amount of human suffering that man caused is incalculable.
posted by monopas at 4:12 PM on July 26, 2018 [6 favorites]
One word: GODDAMNYES. Eat all the foods. Eat them with pleasure. Stop the insanity. Your body knows how to take care of itself. Listen to it!
posted by bologna on wry at 4:13 PM on July 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
posted by bologna on wry at 4:13 PM on July 26, 2018 [4 favorites]
I've said it a few times lately in real life though haven't said it here, but if I could go back in time and change one small thing, I'd do whatever it takes to get Ancel Keys out of dietary research sometime after 1950 but before 1955.
I'm hoping this is unlike the other recent study on dairy which was funded by the dairy industry.
I have more than a slight suspicion - I don't know how well-founded - that a lot of the rehabilitation of meat/shift toward targeting sugar is going to turn out to be swayed by the meat industry.
(Which isn't to say refined sugars are good - I'm going to guess both are a problem!)
posted by atoxyl at 6:45 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
I'm hoping this is unlike the other recent study on dairy which was funded by the dairy industry.
I have more than a slight suspicion - I don't know how well-founded - that a lot of the rehabilitation of meat/shift toward targeting sugar is going to turn out to be swayed by the meat industry.
(Which isn't to say refined sugars are good - I'm going to guess both are a problem!)
posted by atoxyl at 6:45 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
When in doubt, I just eat oatmeal.
posted by Tandem Affinity at 7:35 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Tandem Affinity at 7:35 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
Yeah, but it tastes horrible in macaroni...
posted by Greg_Ace at 8:04 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
posted by Greg_Ace at 8:04 PM on July 26, 2018 [1 favorite]
I'd do whatever it takes to get Ancel Keys out of dietary research sometime after 1950 but before 1955.
This is fascinating. Can you elaborate, or is this worth it's own FPP?
posted by benzenedream at 11:07 PM on July 26, 2018 [2 favorites]
This is fascinating. Can you elaborate, or is this worth it's own FPP?
posted by benzenedream at 11:07 PM on July 26, 2018 [2 favorites]
I have no idea if it's more or less healthy, but as for whole milk, the answer is a full-throated YES. I'm an American expat and live in Japan where people drink whole milk and fat-reduced milk simply doesn't exist (well, maybe it does but you'd have to hunt a bit for it). Actually I imagine 2% is an American thing pretty exclusively. When I went home to the states after a year or two of drinking whole milk and had some 2%...yuck! Two percent milk is terrible; you might as well pour some water in all of your beverages. Mind you, I grew up on 2% and for a good two and a half decades simply thought of it as what milk is. My my how the clouds have parted and skies opened for me on that count.
posted by zardoz at 11:19 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
posted by zardoz at 11:19 PM on July 26, 2018 [5 favorites]
No food is "unhealthy," ffs, unless it's actually toxic or rotten.
Pickled foods, fish sauce, and cheese beg to differ.
posted by fraula at 2:36 AM on July 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
Pickled foods, fish sauce, and cheese beg to differ.
posted by fraula at 2:36 AM on July 27, 2018 [6 favorites]
It is a given with any post like this, anywhere in the world, that the first comment will be something like what is here, something like, why pay attention any more. We pay attention because science is learning things, and the data is important. There will never be one answer for anything. That's the same sentiment that climate deniers throw out there, and it's pretty tired.
posted by agregoli at 5:43 AM on July 27, 2018
posted by agregoli at 5:43 AM on July 27, 2018
As the first commenter, I take umbrage at your equating me with climate denialists. Consider my glove thrown down. I shall see you on the moors at dawn, with scientific studies in hand!
Srsly, complaining about "Cheese good. No, wait, cheese bad. No, good." and "Studies differ, scientists differ" is not even in the same vicinity as "I reject the 95%+ scientific consensus, which has been stable and ever more strongly reaffirmed over the past four decades."
posted by PhineasGage at 5:54 AM on July 27, 2018 [11 favorites]
Srsly, complaining about "Cheese good. No, wait, cheese bad. No, good." and "Studies differ, scientists differ" is not even in the same vicinity as "I reject the 95%+ scientific consensus, which has been stable and ever more strongly reaffirmed over the past four decades."
posted by PhineasGage at 5:54 AM on July 27, 2018 [11 favorites]
That's the same sentiment that climate deniers throw out there, and it's pretty tired.
Unfortunately, the failure of experts to revise nutritional recommendations to reflect new data has probably empowered climate deniers (and anti-vaxxers). "Why pay attention any more" is a reasonable response to the advice that ordinary people have been offered on nutrition, where the science constantly shifts and sometimes even reverses but experts keep their guidelines largely unchanged or modify them quietly while insisting that we have always been at war with sugar (or meat, or eggs, or olive oil...)
posted by Ralston McTodd at 5:58 AM on July 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
Unfortunately, the failure of experts to revise nutritional recommendations to reflect new data has probably empowered climate deniers (and anti-vaxxers). "Why pay attention any more" is a reasonable response to the advice that ordinary people have been offered on nutrition, where the science constantly shifts and sometimes even reverses but experts keep their guidelines largely unchanged or modify them quietly while insisting that we have always been at war with sugar (or meat, or eggs, or olive oil...)
posted by Ralston McTodd at 5:58 AM on July 27, 2018 [1 favorite]
That's the same sentiment that climate deniers throw out there, and it's pretty tired.
If the science on climate change veered wildly in its conclusions from year to year, you'd have a point. That is, clearly, not the case.
Research on what is and is not good for you, and which foods aggravate which pathologies, is constantly changing. There are also lots of for-profit food lobbies that sponsor research, so the outcome of those studies are suspect re: their objectivity. Taking every study at face value and changing your diet accordingly is... is not the same as believing in climate change or the efficacy of vaccines. It is chasing fads.
Here's some solid advice backed by science: eat more fruits and vegetables, stay active, don't eat or drink in excess, don't smoke, socialize as much as makes you happy. Also, climate change is real and please vaccinate your children.
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:43 AM on July 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
If the science on climate change veered wildly in its conclusions from year to year, you'd have a point. That is, clearly, not the case.
Research on what is and is not good for you, and which foods aggravate which pathologies, is constantly changing. There are also lots of for-profit food lobbies that sponsor research, so the outcome of those studies are suspect re: their objectivity. Taking every study at face value and changing your diet accordingly is... is not the same as believing in climate change or the efficacy of vaccines. It is chasing fads.
Here's some solid advice backed by science: eat more fruits and vegetables, stay active, don't eat or drink in excess, don't smoke, socialize as much as makes you happy. Also, climate change is real and please vaccinate your children.
posted by grumpybear69 at 6:43 AM on July 27, 2018 [5 favorites]
Metafilter: Everything in moderation. Including moderation.
posted by rufb at 10:35 AM on July 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
posted by rufb at 10:35 AM on July 27, 2018 [3 favorites]
I see what you did there
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:01 AM on July 27, 2018
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:01 AM on July 27, 2018
The three biggest health/happiness/longevity dials to adjust are: don't smoke, don' be poor, don't be the victim of a crime.
Really only one of those can be addressed individually, the rest are issues of political economy in a country where 33% of the population view it as gods will and what people deserve. Yeah, have some ice-cream and hit that blunt.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 1:08 PM on July 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
Really only one of those can be addressed individually, the rest are issues of political economy in a country where 33% of the population view it as gods will and what people deserve. Yeah, have some ice-cream and hit that blunt.
posted by Anchorite_of_Palgrave at 1:08 PM on July 27, 2018 [2 favorites]
@benzenedream, my particular phrasing is rather wistful and science fictional, but the quick version is that Ancel Keys was probably the single most influential person in modern diet-health research, fats and heart disease particularly. I think that a lot of people would Look at the Seven Countries Study. His bias informed most research that followed, ultimately leading to the flawed guidelines regarding diet (and cholesterol) that the American Heart Association won't stop pushing no matter what new research indicates.
As for the date, 1955 is when he went to a WHO conference and presented some of his work and was put in charge of the Seven Countries Study.
It isn't really a FPP on its own, and we've discussed diet a lot here over the years.
posted by monopas at 12:11 AM on July 28, 2018
As for the date, 1955 is when he went to a WHO conference and presented some of his work and was put in charge of the Seven Countries Study.
It isn't really a FPP on its own, and we've discussed diet a lot here over the years.
posted by monopas at 12:11 AM on July 28, 2018
What has been the most enduring health guideline?
posted by ikea_femme at 11:13 AM on July 28, 2018
posted by ikea_femme at 11:13 AM on July 28, 2018
"Don't tease grizzly bears" has got to be right up there.
posted by Greg_Ace at 11:56 AM on July 28, 2018
posted by Greg_Ace at 11:56 AM on July 28, 2018
Like coffee, cheese for me sits in a balance between what *might* not be that healthy and what doing without *might* make me such an insufferable shit that other people will decide to harm me.
I just try to keep it at two servings a day and hope for the best.
posted by aspersioncast at 3:39 PM on July 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
I just try to keep it at two servings a day and hope for the best.
posted by aspersioncast at 3:39 PM on July 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
I can't imagine life without an exceedingly sharp cheddar, or slightly funky tomme, or a strappy blue cheese that makes me wheeze if I have too much. I can give up other elements of my diet, but cheese is non-negotiable.
posted by mollweide at 6:22 PM on July 28, 2018
posted by mollweide at 6:22 PM on July 28, 2018
It's plainly obvious that the same diet doesn't work for everyone. Pay attention to your body's signals.
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:39 PM on July 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:39 PM on July 28, 2018 [2 favorites]
What I don't understand about cheese is why is it impossible to find cheese made from organic milk. I think there is something about the rennet that makes it hard to make cheese completely organic, but plenty of products are advertised as made with organic .... Why not cheese?
(yes, I buy the organic string cheese from costco which is tasty unlike that small block of expensive organic cheese in my grocery store which tastes a bit funny).
posted by lab.beetle at 11:07 PM on July 28, 2018
(yes, I buy the organic string cheese from costco which is tasty unlike that small block of expensive organic cheese in my grocery store which tastes a bit funny).
posted by lab.beetle at 11:07 PM on July 28, 2018
« Older Hedge Fucking | Ironsworn RPG Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by PhineasGage at 1:13 PM on July 26, 2018 [60 favorites]