Vegetarian Discussion: Fish Pollutants' Link To Diabetes

Fish Pollutants' Link To Diabetes
Posts: 12

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Rosso Berghoff
2007-04-12 17:25:32 EST
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm

Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role in diabetes
More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants found in
oily fish and type two diabetes.

Chico
2007-04-12 17:44:30 EST
Rosso Berghoff wrote:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm
>
> Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role in diabetes
> More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants found in
> oily fish and type two diabetes.

WTF do you not understand about the following points in the article you
linked?

------------
* However, experts have said that the study published in Diabetes Care
is far from conclusive.

* No causal link

But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible that that
having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to clear POPs
from their system, thus explaining the association.

Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
replicated and developed in other studies, and called for molecular
studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin resistance.

Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information at Diabetes UK, said: "Insulin
resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for developing
diabetes and therefore possible contributors to this state are always of
interest."

However, he said the current research was very complex and still
speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the POPs could
cause insulin resistance.

He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise of obesity
can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put down to
increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."
------------

Rosso Berghoff
2007-04-12 18:14:10 EST
chico wrote:
> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm
>>
>> Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role in diabetes
>> More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants found in
>> oily fish and type two diabetes.
>
> WTF do you not understand about the following points in the article you
> linked?

Why do you state that I did not understand, when I only pasted a link
and the first few lines from a BBC web page?

I have not stated anything other than what has been previously published.

>
> ------------
> * However, experts have said that the study published in Diabetes Care
> is far from conclusive.
>
> * No causal link
>
> But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible that that
> having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to clear POPs
> from their system, thus explaining the association.
>
> Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
> replicated and developed in other studies, and called for molecular
> studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin resistance.
>
> Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information at Diabetes UK, said: "Insulin
> resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for developing
> diabetes and therefore possible contributors to this state are always of
> interest."
>
> However, he said the current research was very complex and still
> speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the POPs could
> cause insulin resistance.
>
> He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise of obesity
> can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put down to
> increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."


Yawn, yes I read all that *in context*.

Perhaps that's why I posted a LINK and the first few lines.

If you don't like the message DON'T shoot the messenger!

Eat all the fish you want, I **really** don't care.


> ------------

Chico
2007-04-12 18:20:47 EST
Rosso Berghoff wrote:
> chico wrote:
>> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm
>>>
>>> Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role in diabetes
>>> More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants found in
>>> oily fish and type two diabetes.
>>
>> WTF do you not understand about the following points in the article you
>> linked?
>
> Why do you state that I did not understand, when I only pasted a link
> and the first few lines from a BBC web page?
>
> I have not stated anything other than what has been previously published.
>
>>
>> ------------
>> * However, experts have said that the study published in Diabetes Care
>> is far from conclusive.
>>
>> * No causal link
>>
>> But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible that that
>> having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to clear POPs
>> from their system, thus explaining the association.
>>
>> Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
>> replicated and developed in other studies, and called for molecular
>> studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin resistance.
>>
>> Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information at Diabetes UK, said: "Insulin
>> resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for developing
>> diabetes and therefore possible contributors to this state are always of
>> interest."
>>
>> However, he said the current research was very complex and still
>> speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the POPs could
>> cause insulin resistance.
>>
>> He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise of obesity
>> can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put down to
>> increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."
>
>
> Yawn, yes I read all that *in context*.

Then why didn't you say anything denoting that it's "far from
conclusive" -- by the researchers' own measure -- and provide a subject
intimating some kind of causation?

> Perhaps that's why I posted a LINK and the first few lines.

You only wanted to give an impression of danger, when the researchers
are unconvinced at this point that there is any danger.

> If you don't like the message DON'T shoot the messenger!

You're not merely a messenger, you're an activist. Admit it.

> Eat all the fish you want, I **really** don't care.

Will you have some with me?

Rosso Berghoff
2007-04-12 18:56:20 EST
chico wrote:
> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
>> chico wrote:
>>> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm
>>>>
>>>> Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role in diabetes
>>>> More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants found in
>>>> oily fish and type two diabetes.
>>> WTF do you not understand about the following points in the article you
>>> linked?
>> Why do you state that I did not understand, when I only pasted a link
>> and the first few lines from a BBC web page?

Please answer questions when they are asked. - If you can't answer, just
state.

>>
>> I have not stated anything other than what has been previously published.
>>
>>> ------------
>>> * However, experts have said that the study published in Diabetes Care
>>> is far from conclusive.
>>>
>>> * No causal link
>>>
>>> But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible that that
>>> having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to clear POPs
>>> from their system, thus explaining the association.
>>>
>>> Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
>>> replicated and developed in other studies, and called for molecular
>>> studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin resistance.
>>>
>>> Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information at Diabetes UK, said: "Insulin
>>> resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for developing
>>> diabetes and therefore possible contributors to this state are always of
>>> interest."
>>>
>>> However, he said the current research was very complex and still
>>> speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the POPs could
>>> cause insulin resistance.
>>>
>>> He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise of obesity
>>> can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put down to
>>> increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."
>>
>> Yawn, yes I read all that *in context*.
>
> Then why didn't you say anything denoting that it's "far from
> conclusive" -- by the researchers' own measure -- and provide a subject
> intimating some kind of causation?

I posted an article with the first few lines. - You can read the rest
and draw your OWN conclusions, based on what you READ not what you THINK.

>
>> Perhaps that's why I posted a LINK and the first few lines.
>
> You only wanted to give an impression of danger, when the researchers
> are unconvinced at this point that there is any danger.

You are incorrect and you can not read my mind.

What *EVIDENCE* have you got that I "only wanted to give an impression
of danger"?

>
>> If you don't like the message DON'T shoot the messenger!
>
> You're not merely a messenger, you're an activist. Admit it.

You are incorrect and demonstrate ignorance by what must be a claim of
clairvoyance. - What *EVIDENCE* have you got that I'm "an activist"?

>
>> Eat all the fish you want, I **really** don't care.
>
> Will you have some with me?

No. - Eat as much as you want' with who you want, I **really** don't care.

Chico
2007-04-12 19:06:48 EST
Rosso Berghoff wrote:
> chico wrote:
>> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
>>> chico wrote:
>>>> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
>>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm
>>>>>
>>>>> Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role in diabetes
>>>>> More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants
>>>>> found in
>>>>> oily fish and type two diabetes.
>>>> WTF do you not understand about the following points in the article you
>>>> linked?
>>> Why do you state that I did not understand, when I only pasted a link
>>> and the first few lines from a BBC web page?
>
> Please answer questions when they are asked.

Why should I extend such a courtesy you didn't offer in your own reply,
dummy?

>>> I have not stated anything other than what has been previously
>>> published.
>>>
>>>> ------------
>>>> * However, experts have said that the study published in Diabetes Care
>>>> is far from conclusive.
>>>>
>>>> * No causal link
>>>>
>>>> But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible that that
>>>> having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to clear POPs
>>>> from their system, thus explaining the association.
>>>>
>>>> Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
>>>> replicated and developed in other studies, and called for molecular
>>>> studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin resistance.
>>>>
>>>> Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information at Diabetes UK, said: "Insulin
>>>> resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for developing
>>>> diabetes and therefore possible contributors to this state are
>>>> always of
>>>> interest."
>>>>
>>>> However, he said the current research was very complex and still
>>>> speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the POPs could
>>>> cause insulin resistance.
>>>>
>>>> He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise of obesity
>>>> can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put down to
>>>> increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."
>>>
>>> Yawn, yes I read all that *in context*.
>>
>> Then why didn't you say anything denoting that it's "far from
>> conclusive" -- by the researchers' own measure -- and provide a subject
>> intimating some kind of causation?
>
> I posted an article with the first few lines.

Answer the question instead of spinning.

>>> Perhaps that's why I posted a LINK and the first few lines.
>>
>> You only wanted to give an impression of danger, when the researchers
>> are unconvinced at this point that there is any danger.
>
> You are incorrect and you can not read my mind.

I don't need to be psychic to reach that position.

> What *EVIDENCE* have you got that I "only wanted to give an impression
> of danger"?

See the subject you manually typed in, dummy.

>>> If you don't like the message DON'T shoot the messenger!
>>
>> You're not merely a messenger, you're an activist. Admit it.
>
> You are incorrect

You couldn't bring yourself to note that there may be a link, much less
that researchers were quick to caution there may not be one.

> and demonstrate ignorance

Yours. I read the article and wasn't totally caught off guard by the
fact that the researchers didn't say it was a link to diabetes, but that
it MIGHT be one. You don't appreciate the difference?

>>> Eat all the fish you want, I **really** don't care.
>>
>> Will you have some with me?
>
> No.

Why not?

Sherry
2007-04-13 01:22:21 EST
On Apr 13, 3:56 am, Rosso Berghoff <s...@me.fu.com> wrote:
> chico wrote:
> > Rosso Berghoff wrote:
> >> chico wrote:
> >>> Rosso Berghoff wrote:
> >>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm
>
> >>>> Pesticides found in oily fish could play a role indiabetes
> >>>> More evidence has emerged suggesting a link between pollutants found in
> >>>> oily fish and type twodiabetes.
> >>> WTF do you not understand about the following points in the article you
> >>> linked?
> >> Why do you state that I did not understand, when I only pasted a link
> >> and the first few lines from a BBC web page?
>
> Please answer questions when they are asked. - If you can't answer, just
> state.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >> I have not stated anything other than what has been previously published.
>
> >>> ------------
> >>> * However, experts have said that the study published inDiabetesCare
> >>> is far from conclusive.
>
> >>> * No causal link
>
> >>> But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible that that
> >>> having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to clear POPs
> >>> from their system, thus explaining the association.
>
> >>> Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
> >>> replicated and developed in other studies, and called for molecular
> >>> studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin resistance.
>
> >>> Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information atDiabetesUK, said: "Insulin
> >>> resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for developing
> >>>diabetesand therefore possible contributors to this state are always of
> >>> interest."
>
> >>> However, he said the current research was very complex and still
> >>> speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the POPs could
> >>> cause insulin resistance.
>
> >>> He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise of obesity
> >>> can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put down to
> >>> increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."
>
> >> Yawn, yes I read all that *in context*.
>
> > Then why didn't you say anything denoting that it's "far from
> > conclusive" -- by the researchers' own measure -- and provide a subject
> > intimating some kind of causation?
>
> I posted an article with the first few lines. - You can read the rest
> and draw your OWN conclusions, based on what you READ not what you THINK.
>
>
>
> >> Perhaps that's why I posted a LINK and the first few lines.
>
> > You only wanted to give an impression of danger, when the researchers
> > are unconvinced at this point that there is any danger.
>
> You are incorrect and you can not read my mind.
>
> What *EVIDENCE* have you got that I "only wanted to give an impression
> of danger"?
>
>
>
> >> If you don't like the message DON'T shoot the messenger!
>
> > You're not merely a messenger, you're an activist. Admit it.
>
> You are incorrect and demonstrate ignorance by what must be a claim of
> clairvoyance. - What *EVIDENCE* have you got that I'm "an activist"?
>
>
>
> >> Eat all the fish you want, I **really** don't care.
>
> > Will you have some with me?
>
> No. - Eat as much as you want' with who you want, I **really** don't care.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Dear
I ran into your message quite accidentally while researching about
some details on 'Diabetes' and thought of sharing some of my
findings.
I've read at 'http://www.medical-health-care-information.com/Health-
living/Diabetes/index.asp'
that Diabetes is a set of related diseases in which the body cannot
regulate the amount of sugar (glucose) in the blood.Insulin allows
glucose to move from the blood into liver, muscle, and fat cells,
where it is used for fuel.People with diabetes either do not produce
enough insulin (type 1 diabetes) or cannot use insulin properly (type
2 diabetes), or both
I hope the above is of some help to you as well. Regards, Sherrybove.


Rosso Berghoff
2007-04-13 12:26:23 EST
snip


Let's summarise:

I posted a link with the title pasted from the title of the news article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6544709.stm

and the content pasted from the first few lines of that article

'Chico' has:

Called me childish names.

Lied.

Snipped my posting without acknowledgment.

Deduced that I'm an "activist" and that that I "only wanted to give an
impression of danger". One must presume from clairvoyance, as not one
word from the OP was mine and *copy and pasted* directly from the news
article.

Avoided answering any 'difficult' questions about this, for example
where's the evidence for his or her claims.

He or she can really eat all the fish they want to, I particularly
recommend an oily fish high on the food chain.

Yawn.

Rosso Berghoff
2007-04-13 12:27:27 EST
sherry wrote:
snip
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Dear
> I ran into your message quite accidentally while researching about
> some details on 'Diabetes' and thought of sharing some of my
> findings.
> I've read at 'http://www.medical-health-care-information.com/Health-
> living/Diabetes/index.asp'
> that Diabetes is a set of related diseases in which the body cannot
> regulate the amount of sugar (glucose) in the blood.Insulin allows
> glucose to move from the blood into liver, muscle, and fat cells,
> where it is used for fuel.People with diabetes either do not produce
> enough insulin (type 1 diabetes) or cannot use insulin properly (type
> 2 diabetes), or both
> I hope the above is of some help to you as well. Regards, Sherrybove.
>
Thanks for the thought.

Chico
2007-04-13 17:31:11 EST
Rosso Berghoff wrote:

> snip
>
>
> Let's summarise:

Why summarize what you snipped?

RESTORE

> Please answer questions when they are asked.

Why should I extend such a courtesy you didn't offer in your own reply,
dummy?

>>> >>> I have not stated anything other than what has been previously
>>> >>> published.
>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> ------------
>>>> >>>> * However, experts have said that the study published in
Diabetes Care
>>>> >>>> is far from conclusive.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> * No causal link
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> But the work does not confirm a causal link - it is possible
that that
>>>> >>>> having insulin resistance could reduce people's ability to
clear POPs
>>>> >>>> from their system, thus explaining the association.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Lead author Professor Duk-Hee Lee said the evidence needed to be
>>>> >>>> replicated and developed in other studies, and called for
molecular
>>>> >>>> studies to explain the link between pesticides and insulin
resistance.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> Matt Hunt, Head of Science Information at Diabetes UK, said:
"Insulin
>>>> >>>> resistance is often observed as an early warning sign for
developing
>>>> >>>> diabetes and therefore possible contributors to this state are
>>>> >>>> always of
>>>> >>>> interest."
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> However, he said the current research was very complex and still
>>>> >>>> speculative and did not provide a mechanism by the which the
POPs could
>>>> >>>> cause insulin resistance.
>>>> >>>>
>>>> >>>> He said: "At the moment we would not conclude that the rise
of obesity
>>>> >>>> can be attributed to pesticide use, and should still be put
down to
>>>> >>>> increasingly unhealthy diets and lack of exercise."
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Yawn, yes I read all that *in context*.
>> >>
>> >> Then why didn't you say anything denoting that it's "far from
>> >> conclusive" -- by the researchers' own measure -- and provide a
subject
>> >> intimating some kind of causation?
> >
> > I posted an article with the first few lines.

Answer the question instead of spinning.

>>> >>> Perhaps that's why I posted a LINK and the first few lines.
>> >>
>> >> You only wanted to give an impression of danger, when the researchers
>> >> are unconvinced at this point that there is any danger.
> >
> > You are incorrect and you can not read my mind.

I don't need to be psychic to reach that position.

> > What *EVIDENCE* have you got that I "only wanted to give an impression
> > of danger"?

See the subject you manually typed in, dummy.

>>> >>> If you don't like the message DON'T shoot the messenger!
>> >>
>> >> You're not merely a messenger, you're an activist. Admit it.
> >
> > You are incorrect

You couldn't bring yourself to note that there may be a link, much less
that researchers were quick to caution there may not be one.

> > and demonstrate ignorance

Yours. I read the article and wasn't totally caught off guard by the
fact that the researchers didn't say it was a link to diabetes, but that
it MIGHT be one. You don't appreciate the difference?

>>> >>> Eat all the fish you want, I **really** don't care.
>> >>
>> >> Will you have some with me?
> >
> > No.

Why not?


END RESTORE

> 'Chico' has:
>
> Called me childish names.

I should've called you a whiny little crybaby, you whiny little crybaby.
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron