Which blows my mind, because when all else in the diet holds equal, swapping two sugar'd sodas with two artificially sweetened sodas will save you (using my old vice Dr Pepper as an example) 54g sugar and 200 calories per day. It's just a little annoying that WHO (or this article, not sure who's most at fault) decided not to get into the nuance that people tend to make up those missing 200 calories in other ways.
Agree. The lede "Don't consume artificial sweeteners" reads like "they're poison". They're not. The better title should have been "Artificial Sweetener Use Is Not A Long Term Weight Management Strategy".
Not that anybody actually reads or pays attention to these things when they're wolfing down a bag of fritos; but still to the person at What-a-burger getting an 1100 calorie meal - they're probably better off opting for 400 fewer calories with a diet Coke than a fully loaded one.
We now know that the intestines have 'taste buds' that can detect sweetness.
There's a theory, and I don't know how tested it is at present, that the body uses these detectors to control the digestion process. Within this theory, the presence of the artificial sweeteners may encourage the body to work harder to scavenge calories from your digestive tract.
The upshot of this model is that if you eat a burger with a glass of water, you absorb X calories. If you eat the burger with a diet Sprite, you might be absorbing X + Y calories instead.
Remember, calorie counts for food are based on measures of caloric value of a unit of food minus the caloric value of what the average person excretes. If we were furnaces instead of meat we would get more calories from our food. And if you have odd digestive microbes you may be absorbing more or less calories from your food.
The caveats section covers a lot of variations, between food samples and individual digestive tracts.
I've you've ever been diagnosed with anything that isn't mainstream, you're familiar with how much the medical community likes to stuff pegs of any shape into their favorite receptacles. A patient with ideopathic symptoms could be lying to you and sneaking food in the parking lot (I've known a couple of those), or they could be an anomaly. Singular or a few percent of the population. The world of genetics is vast and a handful of rare conditions can net you several examples within your Dunbar number.
We have a lot of people these days who don't seem to correspond directly to calories in/calories out. And unless they're absorbing energy from the universe, then something about our assumptions is broken.
At work I often find myself having to remind people that if your assumptions tell you that an event must be impossible, then it's not your eyes that are wrong but your assumptions. Half of debugging is being able to efficiently name your assumptions and sort them by probability x difficulty of verification.
If people aren't losing weight on diet soda, we need to be dismissing rules of thumb and directly testing patients instead of shrugging and saying, "exercise more, scrub." Which is a polite characterization of how medical people treat my obese friends.
"All else being equal" doesn't seem to really happen in practise. Some mechanism means this doesn't work. Maybe Swapping 2 sodas (diet or not) for e.g. 2 glasses of water means you will have less sugar dependence over time and will get healthier all around.
It does happen in practice, but unfortunately because it doesn't happen in practice on average, the WHO has opted away from educating people on the nuances and instead continue this maddening war about which is worse.
The other issue is that there's so much variance. Are you making an effort at improving the quality of your food and made up that 200 calories with nutrient rich items? Too bad, you still aren't losing weight, so WHO declares that diet soda is ineffective for weight loss, articles summarize and declare that artificial sweeteners are bad for you, and you still get people thinking that diet soda is worse for you than regular soda.
"Doesn't happen in practise" probably didn't fully describe what I meant - i.e. on average across populations if you tell people to "just" change their drinks for diet drinks, it seems other parts of the diet compensate for the lost calories.
> All my food is measured out and counted beforehand.
That's great, but that is not representative of most people.
Location: Denver, CO
Remote: Remote/Hybrid/In-House all acceptable
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies:
In depth recent experience with:
React, NextJS, NodeJS, Typescript, Express, HTML CSS, Webpack, SPAs & state management, react-testing-library, Jest, WGAC 2.0 Compliant Web Accessibility Standards & Development, AWS (S3, Lambda, Gateway), Terraform
I've used these before but either not professionally or it was a long time ago:
GO, Clojure, Python, Java, Elisp, GraphQL, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Spring
Résumé/CV: https://flowcv.com/resume/vdsvg8neue
Email: parkerjohnsonwebdev+hn@gmail.com
About me:
I'm currently a 9 YOE senior full stack engineer at a nonprofit education organization, but I'm looking for a change. The last few years I've provided the majority of my value on the Frontend in React, Node, Typescript, but I am very interested in opportunities that expect me to be more Full Stack and I'd be very motivated to get up to speed quickly with oneOf[Go, Python, Clojure, Rust], as I'd like to extend my breadth of knowledge.
While not having this isn't a deal breaker by any means, a "cherry on top" type fit would be an organization where I can provide value to you with my current bread and butters (React, JS, Typescript) while expecting me to get up to speed in a new backend language quickly.
Location: Denver, CO
Remote: Remote/Hybrid/In-House all acceptable
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies:
In depth recent experience with: React, NextJS, NodeJS, Typescript, Express, HTML CSS, Webpack, SPAs & state management, react-testing-library, Jest, WGAC 2.0 Compliant Web Accessibility Standards & Development, AWS (S3, Lambda, Gateway), Terraform
Moderate or aging familiarity with: GO, Clojure, Python, Java, Elisp, GraphQL, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Spring
Résumé/CV: https://flowcv.com/resume/vdsvg8neue
Email: parkerjohnsonwebdev+hn@gmail.com
About me:
I'm currently a senior full stack engineer at a nonprofit education organization, but I'm looking for a change. The last few years I've provided the majority of my value on the Frontend in React, Node, Typescript, but I am very interested in opportunities that expect me to be more Full Stack and I'd be very motivated to get up to speed quickly with oneOf[Go, Python, Clojure, Rust], as I'd like to extend my breadth of knowledge.
While not having this isn't a deal breaker by any means, a "cherry on top" type fit would be an organization where I can provide value to you with my current bread and butters (React, JS, Typescript) while expecting me to get up to speed in a different backend language quickly.
The post itself covers in the intro that they made the conscious decision to go with a monorepo, accepting the downsides of it. Much more than this article though, I'd like to read one discussing that decision and why they went that direction.
I've personally rarely even needed to useMemo, I just write a function that returns the JSX I need and { myFunction() } in the functional component's return (given React).
If you're using Typescript that can get a bit annoying, since you'll also need to pass in whatever props necessary for the function to handle the logic + type them. Makes it nice and easy to test in isolation though.
Typically the function has access to whatever props or state it needs because it's in the scope of the component. It's not pure, but it's rare that I need to verbosely pass props into the function call and then accept them in myFunction. I don't typically test these functions in isolation as the component itself is pure and I test the output of the component as a whole instead.
I learned skiing at ~8yo and did it until ~16, where I picked up snowboarding. I loved the change of pace, but now that I'm 30, I'm heavily considering switching back to skiing for a few reasons:
- My hips simply can not handle being twisted asymmetrically while waiting in line and sitting on the lift. Lifting and waiting to lift is probably 2/3 of your time spent on the mountain if you go fast, and my body is starting to hate it.
- A lot of my friends are picking up snow sports, and I've probably spent around half of my days in the past two years watching and helping a beginner learn. This is incredibly taxing to do on a snowboard - making your way around the bunny slopes is exhausting and requires constant booting in/out, which is a huge pain compared to skiing.
- I'm falling more. As the mountains have grown understaffed, I'm starting to succumb to the classic "fell because I was riding heelside and hit a surprise jump because of an un-groomed patch of snow." I know from experience that I'd carve right through these on skis.
- More mountain accessibility. As time goes on, I'm realizing how much of the mountain I simply stay away from because the conditions for snowboarding are rough. I stay away from moguls now, and un-groomed or icy runs provide a lot bigger of a challenge and risk when boarding. Further, commuting across catwalks is a lot less taxing on skis than a snowboard.
I'm 44 and can agree with some of what you say. I started snowboarding at 20 after skiing as a kid.
My hips are mostly OK in the lift line but otherwise I get what you're saying. Adjusting your stance might help with that. Other fitness routines can help too. I want to say I had more trouble last year than this year.
Totally agree with how taxing it is to wait for people. My 9 year old is learning snowboarding and it's exhausting to sit/stand/sit/stand waiting for someone. Also being in a mixed group of riders & skiers sucks for everyone. The skiers don't want to wait for anyone to buckle up off the lift. Riders don't want to stop and stand around, they want to sit if they stop. Riders can't keep up great if you have to ski/ride uphill.
I don't fall any more than I used to. Frankly there is a different situation.. I expect I would fall on ice far more if I want back to skiing. Conditions where I go have never been icier.. the snowboard just has incredible edge hold across ice.
Perhaps you're on the wrong board for the conditions you're riding? I rode the wrong board for a long time being stubborn not wanting to buy a new one. When I finally got a new one and had experience to guide buying the new one I ended up choosing one that was just such a huge improvement. But not for ice, my old one was exceptional over ice as well.
My organization's most recent hack day was won by the UX team signing up for a free demo of a chat bot service and demoing it - not a single line of code. We haven't had one since, nor do we use chat bots anywhere in our org a few years later.
Hackathons are not about tech, they are about business value now. They are a chance for individual contributors or low level managers to present business ideas to their bosses. Bosses don’t really care about tech.
I see where you're going - but I've personally noticed that there are a lot of things coming along with these cloud infrastructure paradigms that have made me feel like my localhost text editing workflows are going to make me look and feel even more like an absolute dinosaur as time goes on. I can't speak eloquently on this as I'm still an amateur to these cloud infra configuration concepts and their real limitations on how I'm used to thinking about application development, but I hope this comment sparks some inspiration for someone else to do so.
