Logic

Hi there, Governor. Both of these photos show decommissioned projects that were completed. The photo your staffer shared on the left is the original Seven Mile Bridge connecting the Florida mainland to the Keys that was operational between 1912 and 1982 (refurbished for automobiles after the Labor Day Hurricane of 1935) until sections of it were removed for the new bridge. 🔗pigeonkey.net/a-short-histor… 🔗keysweekly.com/42/keys-histor… 🔗ci.marathon.fl.us/community/page… The photograph on the right shows the U.S. Route 96 Neches River Bridge just west of Evadale, Texas. It was decommissioned when a new one was built a half a mile or so to the northwest because the highway was rerouted. 🔗texasfreeway.com/Statewide/Jasp… 🔗@30.3509846,-94.0857434,2027m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI2MDMxNS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">google.com/maps/@30.35098… What a colossal failure of a dunk attempt this turned out to be. You and your team are LOSERS!! 🤣

Behold! The @nytimes becomes educated on the science of the ketogenic diet and mental health. This is so encouraging to see! The first article was on Feb 5 (at the bottom). The most recent one, 5 weeks later, was just published (listed on top). In these few weeks, reporters took time to investigate the existing science on diet and serious mental illness. This science is still preliminary--but it is enormously promising. Congrats to the NYTimes for continuing its inquiry on this important subject.

Lp(a) has emerged as a relatively potent driver of residual cardiovascular risk! We are told it is genetic and that a healthy diet cannot effect it! The reality is that several studies show that replacing carbs with saturated fat can and does lower it, sometimes fairly significantly! pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC78…

I can't help but beleive the poeple making these studies do this intentionally, they add a little footnote to get them off the hook that most people will never read. They know the ignorant news sites will take the headline and run it, they know people will read those articles and base their belief off little more than a headline and never look deeper. It must be intentional. If it wasn't intentional then the foot note would have been in bold at the top of the study.

Here's a Great Example of Big headlines about Vegetarian Diets being complete BS 5 headlines (including Oxford's own press release) claimed this new Oxford paper shows a vegetarian diet “slashes” the risk of 5 cancers. THIS IS NOT TRUE. Read on... The paper: nature.com/articles/s4141… Oxford release: ndph.ox.ac.uk/news/largest-s… Sky: news.sky.com/story/vegetari… Independent: the-independent.com/news/uk/home-n… Independent alt: the-independent.com/news/health/re… BBC: bbc.com/news/articles/… What the study Actually found in its main adjusted models: *Vegetarians had lower HRs for pancreatic, breast, prostate, kidney cancer, and multiple myeloma. *But vegetarians also had a HIGHER risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. So even before any adjustments, this was never a simple “vegetarian protects against cancer” paper. The central issue is not that the models were “unadjusted”, the real issue is multiple comparisons. This paper tested many associations across diet groups and cancer sites, which raises the odds of false positives if you focus only on nominal P<0.05 findings. To the authors’ credit, they did address this. They explicitly say they report nominally significant findings and also mark which survive false discovery rate correction. News outlets used to have Science Editors would have known that the “5 cancers” claim Disappears once you apply the paper’s own stricter filters. In the GI cancer section, the paper says the FDR-significant findings were: • lower colorectal cancer risk in pescatarians • higher colorectal cancer risk in vegans • higher esophageal squamous cell carcinoma risk in vegetarians Not “vegetarians are robustly protected from 5 cancers.” Then the sensitivity analyses narrow it much further. The authors themselves say the most consistent findings were: • HIGHER risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in vegetarians! • LOWER risk of kidney cancer in vegetarians. The other 9 nominally significant associations were not statistically significant in one or both sensitivity analyses. The strongest vegetarian signal was not protective. It was harmful: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in vegetarians HR 1.93 95% CI 1.30–2.87 And that remained statistically significant in the sensitivity analyses. Kidney cancer was the most durable protective vegetarian signal in the sensitivity analyses. But the broad media claim that vegetarian diets “slash risk of 5 cancers by up to 30%” leans on nominal associations that did not survive the paper’s own tougher checks. This is why science reporting so often goes off the rails. The press release highlights the attractive nominal findings. Then ignorant reporters amplify them. Then you blindly believe the headlines and try to be a vegetarian. The caveats about false discovery rate correction, sensitivity analyses, small case numbers, and residual confounding all get buried. At best, this is an interesting observational paper. It is hypothesis-generating, but it does NOT robustly show that vegetarian diets protect against 5 cancers. If anything, the most statistically durable vegetarian finding in the paper was an increased risk of one cancer subtype, not a reduced risk. So, the most accurate headline for this paper is... VEG DIET INCREASES RISK OF ESOPHAGEAL CANCER Also see great tweet about this from @AdamRochussen

🚨🚨🚨It's Official🚨🚨🚨 Mark your calendars! The Cholesterol Code documentary drops April 17th, 2026 on Amazon

@MarkBski It blows my mind anyone, especially a doctor, can still push the low fat nonsense.

Obesity & diabetes were rare for the 400,000 years of human existence before low fat dietary recommendations. But for the several past decades the levels of obesity and diabetes have sky rocketed. Yet this guy claims it's because people don't follow what didn't exist for most of our existence. He claims it's "science." This is nutritional disinformation, not science.

So in this study markers of metabolic health like T2D Triglyceride and blood pressure were FAR more important than cholesterol in cardiovascular risk We just don’t talk nearly enough about fasting Triglyceride I wonder why ? @DrScottMurray @bschermd

It seems like if there were laws that severely fine or punish companies for producing data or studies that are manipulated to help them make more money at the detriment of peoples health it would be a good thing for humanity. I don't have much problem with a industry funding a study as long as they don't cherry pick who does it and have nothing to do with the design or conducting the study, it should be 100% hands off.

I've been saying for years that exercise is a poor way to lose weight. @cocacola spent $1.5 million to fund a group of scientists whose one job was to tell you that exercise — not diet — was the solution to obesity. They called it the "Global Energy Balance Network." Internal emails showed Coke helped design the group's mission. They published papers. Gave talks. Ran a website. All pushing one message: you can outrun a bad diet. In 2015, the New York Times and NPR exposed everything. The network shut down. The university returned the money. But the myth stuck. "Just exercise more" is still the go-to advice — and that's exactly what the soda industry wanted. You cannot outrun a bad diet. Follow the funding. #CocaCola #BigSoda #FoodIndustry #Obesity #SugarScience #ExerciseMyth #FollowTheMoney #FollowTheFunding #GlobalEnergyBalanceNetwork #FoodPolitics #MetabolicHealth #RealFood #VinnieTortorich #GEBN #ProcessedFood #FoodFraud #NutritionScience #HealthTruth

Bubba Joe: I eat hamburgers every day. Food questionnaire Study "scientist": Eating hamburgers every day causes obesity and heart disease.

Two million years of human evolution say eat meat. Seventy years of food industry funding say don't. Choose your source.

Love to see you're reversing your high blood sugars with Keto/Carnivore! Did you know there is a Society that educates people how to reverse Type 2 Diabetes with Low-Carb/Keto/Carnivore eating? The @OfficialADSOrg will teach the world how to do what @WallStreetMav is doing right now! americandiabetessociety.org

@WallStreetMav Diabetes is a terrible and destructive disease and it greatly increases the risk of CVD. The good news is it is absolutely reversible with diet, and exercise helps as well.

New record low blood sugar for myself since I started carnivore diet. It works. This is in the morning, before eating anything, about 12 hours since I ate anything. I used to have readings between 130 to 160 around this time. Meat, eggs, fish, water and unsweetened iced tea.

Another win for the carnivore diet.

Even if this were true, it isn't, there are 100's of other books and scientific studies, metanalysis that all show overwhelming data showing there is no benefit to removing or reducing animal fat and protein from the diet. This is key here because vegans like to focus on one single thing that shows a weak association and ignore the millions of other points of data, information and common sense. This reminds me of how a young earth creationist will use a single piece of information, like a tree found through multiple layers of earth that should not be possible, as 100% proof all while ignoring the millions of other fossils, layers etc. showing the earth is very old.

@bigfatsurprise The critical review of her book is broken into two parts (as there are so many errors to correct) The Big Fat Surprise : A Critical Review (Part 1) thescienceofnutrition.wordpress.com/2014/08/10/the…

Confused about saturated fat? This book published a decade ago detailed the politics, science and history of this controversial fat.

Even the godfather of the diet heart hypothesis, which is what 100% of the anti saturated fat and cholesterol misinformation stems from admitted that there is no connection between cholesterol in the food and cholesterol in the blood. “There’s no connection whatsoever between cholesterol in food and cholesterol in the blood. None. And we’ve known that all along. Cholesterol in the diet doesn’t matter at all unless you happen to be a chicken or a rabbit.” - Ancel Keys FYI the study that helped start the cholesterol misinformation was done on rabbits, the same study was replicated on dog which have a much more similar digestion system compared to humans and guess what, there was no negative affects of cholesterol for the dogs. Vegans going on and on repeating debunked onion pieces is very much like trying to debate with a flat earther. It doesn't matter how much evidence or science you use to show why the earth is not flat, they just believe it for whatever reason and no amount of common sense will change that.

@bigfatsurprise For those at higher risk for CVD, reducing saturated fat leads to: "important reductions in mortality & major cardiovascular events, particularly for myocardial infarction, with respect to replacing saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat" acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/AN…

@LLicit_Tweet @bigfatsurprise I bet you will never guess what part of the scientific triangle 99% of what you believe comes from. Actually that's generous, much of what you believe is even lower and not shown in the picture.

@bigfatsurprise Is Nina Teicholz right about saturated fat or is she a lobbyist for the meat industry? youtube.com/watch?v=OkqWdY…

LOL, some generic chart doesn't change the fact that the diet heart hypothesis is dead, debunked and has been for over a decade. There is so much information and data available now that hs9ows there is zero benefit to reducing meat or saturated fat from the diet it is beyond delusional to keep pushing the anti meat and fat myths. Vegans are the biggest and most delusional offenders. Not just because crops death completely invalidate the fake moral high ground they have been brain washed into believing but also because your belief system relies on a large list of fallacies, delusions, lies and myths that are continually and ignorantly propagated in spite of a mountain of strong evidence that continually disproves these things.

@bigfatsurprise No surprises here from Miss Meatfluencer 126,000 men & women followed for up to 32 years Assessments every 4 years Dietary fat: From foe to friend? SCIENCE16 NOV 2018 : 764–770

@bigfatsurprise Fantastic and eye opening book.