On 4/19/11 8:07 PM April 19, 2011, ss wrote:
On Wednesday 20 Apr 2011 8:23:39 am Udhay Shankar N wrote:
"Sanguine"? How do you come to that conclusion?
That is a kinder word than ignorant, or ill informed.
Did you do this to be funny or recursive or are you merely playing
Humpty-Dumpty?
There are lots of other words that are far kinder than ignorant or
ill-informed, many of which, like sanguine, don't mean ignorant or
ill-informed. You might as well have said that conclusion was lavender
or feline for the meaning we were able to derive from the word you chose.
Concentrating on sugar alone in a subject that really has no clear answers is
a mistake. If this guy has been studying sugar all these years he certainly
does not show the degree of enlightenmment he should have.
There is a complex interplay of factiors that science still has not figured
out. And this guy is having a rant about sugar, biting his nails and worrying
about sugar. Could be be some form of neurotic obsession IMO.
Yes, an ad hominem attack with a hearty dollop of psychologizing is
certainly a persuasive argument.
Now, if you would care to tell me what in particular is wrong about
Robert Lustig's description of glucose and fructose metabolism, I would
love to replace his ignorant ideas with your far better informed ones.
--
Heather Madrone ([email protected])
http://www.sunsplinter.blogspot.com
I'd love to change the world, but they won't give me access to the source code.
