Keep posting more BS like this and you will increase your credibility. [/s]
Fats are not you enemy if you control carbs in your studies. I guess the Krebs Cycle was not your strong point.
We have a confused poster here. I think he's belittling your "notions" on de novo lipogenesis though what, exactly, the Krebs cycle has to do with it escapes me.
BTW, I met Hans Krebs while in graduate school. I think it was just before the Yucatan meteor struck. 8^) He made a point of having a separate meeting with us students. He told us to avoid trends and stick to fundamentals. Good advice.
Yes, he is most certainly confused. I have no idea if he’s trying to debate the Krebs cycle, de novo lipogenesis, or the first law of thermodynamics. I don’t believe he even knows what he’s trying to say. This is the problem with folks who have never really studied chemistry or physiology in any meaningful way – they don’t really know what the hell they’re talking about. Yeah, they probably read a few books and dug up some relevant research on PubMed. They might even have stayed at a Holiday Inn Express recently however, they really don’t understand the subject, which is probably why they get so nasty when confronted by someone who does.
BTW, I met Hans Krebs while in graduate school. I think it was just before the Yucatan meteor struck.
I see you go back like I do…..although I believe our friend is still trying to Google something up about that Yucatan meteor…….:^)
He told us to avoid trends and stick to fundamentals. Good advice.
Yup, and it’s excellent advice that is even more appropriate today. I had the opportunity to hear Norman Borlaug speak at an ACSH event many years ago, and he essentially said the same thing. He railed on the proliferation of junk science and the fact that public education was creating a generation of scientific illiterates who, because they had no meaningful education in science, would believe all the crap being published and passed off as legitimate. For that reason, you can read posts from self- proclaimed mavens here claiming that you can consume 3,000 calories a day, while burning off just 2,000 calories a day through metabolic processes and exercise, and lose weight -- as long as you only consume fats, and absolutely no carbs. Apparently, and contrary to what we were taught, you CAN get something from nothing. I’m sure it killed guys like Borlaug to hear this kind of nonsense. He told us nothing bothered him more than listening to the Luddites curse GMO food when his genetic engineering saved a billion people, mostly children and infants, from starvation. His fears, along with those of Krebs, manifest themselves on this forum with regularity.
Our schools today praise the lies of Rachel Carson, who has killed tens of millions, while nary saying a word about Borlaug who saved hundreds of millions. Guys like Taubes make a fortune denying the thermodynamic perspective and basic human nutritional biology, while those of us who stick to the fundamentals earn only the scorn of the practitioners of new age nutritional nonsense. It doesn’t matter if it’s Hans Krebs, the brilliant German biochemist, or Benjamin Krebs the plumber from Hoboken (and I spent some time in The Village myself back in the day- Sullivan Street), the conventional wisdom hasn’t changed, and the bottom line is still all about calories.