When traveling or socializing we have less control of our food quality and preparation. What Carnivore options do you choose when your out?

  • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    So after all these people came into the community, hexbear blocked our community, so they wont see our replies. I’m not sure we lost any subscribers when they blocked us - but it’s possible.

    • psud@aussie.zoneM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I don’t think I’m sad to see them gone, though I hope that when vegans organise a brigade, some of them read what they’re arguing against

      I wonder if the posts they attack now are intended to reduce exposure of their people to the science

      • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        There is hope some will read, but most came by didn’t engage in a good faith discussion, what discussion that happened was focused on emotions rather then outcomes. Heck, they misquoted me, and slandered uninvolved people.

        https://hexbear.net/post/4737964

        I have noticed a trend, most people don’t want to have a discussion, or think about topics - They want to dump their opinion or emotional take and then walk away. Very rarely, vanishingly, will someone actually engage in a follow-up discussion after their initial dump.

        This raises some interesting implications

        • Most people are not interested in changing other people’s minds
        • Most people are not interested in having a challenging discussion about a niche topic
        • Most people are not interested in engaging at any depth

        So most of lemmy is emotional hot takes, upvotes and downvotes based on feelings, and some political grandstanding… I suppose that is social media in general. Fair enough, people come to social media to vibe, and not discuss the topics they are not focused on.

        Example - https://hackertalks.com/post/9675003/8318457

        This person used 3 ad hominem attacks, one expert opinion cited twice (same person two interviews), and called published research not credible. My response was a dispassionate and complete as I could make it… no response at all. They only came into the conversation to drop their negativity on the topic, and no interest in moving the needle. It was a emotional interaction.

        • psud@aussie.zoneM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yeah the bulk are not looking to learn, but Reddit’s zerocarb community has a lot of ex-vegans who knew about carnivore (zero carb) only because they had been sent there to disrupt it, and so when their health deteriorated enough to make them abandon vegan they remembered zeeocarb’s mantra “meat heals”

          I very much like your willingness to engage them

          • jet@hackertalks.comOPM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I very much like your willingness to engage them

            It’s good practice, and lets me check my logic. I do enjoy a healthy back and forth debate, where people disagree but engage in real constructive dialog.

            I have a good friend who was a vegan the entire time I knew him, and now he eats some meat, and is cutting down on carbs. All thanks to years long patience, the compelling nature of a continuous glucose monitor, and no judgement. On a personal level - I really don’t care what someone eats, if they are getting the outcomes they want, then more power to them. If, however, they are not getting the outcomes they like, I’m happy to throw my two cents in.

            My one bug bear in the lemmy discourse is the people who don’t read papers but cite papers. Because they are just forwarding something someone else read, there is no way to discuss the paper with them.

            I suppose I have two bug bears - epidemiology used as “proof” because no better evidence exists is just lazy thinking… dismissing opposing epidemiology and promoting inline epidemiology isn’t science, its just religion with extra steps.

            • psud@aussie.zoneM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              who don’t read papers but cite papers

              On the good side their arguments are terrible