Ok, I never really got a answer to this question so its been sitting in the back my of my head for a long time. I’ve stumbled across a plausible explanation

The Randall cycle : A cross inhibition between glucose and fatty acid metabolism in every cell. When both high glucose levels and high fatty acid levels exist at the same time the Randle cycle causes the cell to rapidly fluctuate between both method, which does cause stress and inflammation in the cell… now some handwaving… this is manifested as insulin resistance (i.e. the cell can’t update more glucose because of the Randle cycle inhibition)

Now… this is a CROSS inhibition… so if you remove one of the sources (glucose, and fatty acids) then the Randle cycle just stays in one mode and you don’t get the seesaw inflammation.

This would account for the all starch diet being able to fix insulin resistance (no free fatty acids). It’s a mechanistic explanation that works for me. i don’t understand it fully, but it seems to fit.

Obviously going all glucose isn’t super healthy, and I wouldn’t recommend it, but it has been a puzzle on why it works in some circumstances.

i.e. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlsjnLMANDQ

100%. The core problem is inserted politics won’t save a bad project, and since the project is bad the only interesting thing to talk about is the inserted politics.

A great project, or even just good, can insert whatever it likes and people will focus on the good parts and the inserted politics won’t dominate the conversation.

My rule of thumb: if the only thing you hear about a project is how political it is, then it’s a bad project and there is nothing else worth talking about.

Yeah, it’s good for high frequency communication because its more resilient to noise and capacitive interference.

Here is my current understanding

For some external reason you are prejudiced against zero carb. In the heat of the moment you thought you would punch down on a tiny community by saying it’s dangerous that it exists, invoking the paradox of tolerance, implying it’s a Nazi type of thing.

When asked why a diet is something causes intolerance by tolerating it you realized you didn’t have a good reason for that statement. You have attempted to leave gaps for others to infer your reasons because stating them explicitly would show how inconsistent they were.

This entire comment thread has been a demonstration of avoidance.

If I’m wrong, please disabuse me of my conclusion.

LVDS is just a standard for pairwise low voltage differential signaling. You still need a protocol on top of that to talk to the video controller.

Shouldn’t Greenland be much smaller?

I hate April’s fools

I decided to do a sample of Edward Goeke’s video analysis https://youtu.be/F03xosbz7es

He is very insufferable, but well spoke, he suffers from extreme confidence. I think he is a great resource to challenge your understanding of various metabolic concepts, but I wouldn’t use him as a primary source. He often criticizes Ben for doing a thing (anthropomorphizing cells) and proceeds to do it himself…

He very VERY strongly says insulin-resistance doesn’t exist, but better described as a cross inhibition of the Randle Cycle…

I get very perspicacious student vibes from him, trying to show off

my trigger here is you stated there is a reason the paradox of tolerance would apply to zero-carb, but will not state the reasons. You leave it up to me, the reader, to infer your biases, context, and motivations. I wish to understand the actual argument, and not till at windmills.

Obviously I don’t think zero-carb is intolerant of other diets, hence my request for you to enumerate your rational. If you insist on me divining strawmen arguments… I will, but I’d much rather hear your actual logic.

I’m happy to keep providing you, infinite, opportunities to explain why the paradox of intolerance is applicable to a diet community

Oh wow the value add! My IPO sense is tingling.

i invite you to complete the thought that started this whole thread rather then saying you don’t have time to complete the thought.

and yet I still don’t know why the Paradox of Intolerance would apply to a zero-carb community…

i get the impression your externalizing some previous conflict onto a group of dieters.

There is a difference between people expressing their dislike (downvoting) and being intolerant. I’m fully aware lemmy has about 4 active zero carb posters, we are a tiny group. I’m not worried about people not liking my community, that is fine, I am promoting the community to find other people who actually want to talk about and interact with the diet.

people THIS opposite

I’m very surprised that people see a diet as a political thing, and I’m sorry we are stuck in that discussion. Some people define themselves by their intolerance of others, and I think that isn’t great for lemmy.

Ah yes, the 2am truck stop “Food Ball”, the hall-mark of any good road trip

i really would love to be able to just buy pemmican instead of having to make it on my own. its a complete meal

if his shoe came off… it wasn’t going to have a good time

Please explain it to me, I don’t understand why tolerating people having a safe space to talk about a diet is a bad thing

The Zero Carb community (as tiny as it is) does not have an agenda of stopping other diets.

indeed

back in the tough old days, when men were men, dogs were dogs… rougher… tougher.

why not make a community for your political discussions?