Karyoplasma

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Horror story time:

As a child, my cousin liked to play in a small, wooded area close to his garden and one day, a long time ago, he must have had a tick. He didn't notice it, nobody noticed anything strange and years (10+ years) later he got problems with rheumatic attacks and arthritis. Doctors were stumped as an adolescent shouldn't present with this. They checked genetic factors which were negative and treated the symptoms. It got worse and worse over the years, many visits to many doctors and specialists, they all had no idea what the cause of his problems were.

2 years ago (he is 38 now), he got a new knee joint and this year, he had to get a hip replacement because the arthritis. On a whim, a doctor did some tests and found that he has long-term Lyme borreliosis, likely from a tick, but never presented with the more common symptoms and had an unusually long onset time for the long-term effects of the untreated disease.

All of his problems could have been prevented with a few doses of antibiotics.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Penicillin saved my leg. Nothing bit me, I just kept scratching a wound because it was itchy.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

The system is gonna stay the same if the people don't change. That's why I like gen Z, they are smart enough to not put up with that bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Yesterday, I was in the local Aldi to get some groceries and the cashier was sick. Coughing constantly, blowing her nose between customers. People complimented her for her strong will and eagerness to go to work despite being sick and found it admirable to act like this, I found it disgusting and was questioning my sanity.

Why is it socially acceptable to spread your bullshit disease everywhere instead of just staying at home and recovering quicker? Humanity learned nothing from covid.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

A thoughtful gift to a mad and self-described evil scientist.

[–] [email protected] 91 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz

He is actually a really good dad throughout the show.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

There seems to be a confusion here:

Amylose is a polysaccharide and one of the two compounds that form starch (alongside amylopectin). What Oatly adds is amylase, one of the enzymes in our body that breaks down polysaccharides into absorbable sugars which means that their oat milk already contains higher amounts of reduced sugars due to that process which is shown in the study I've linked earlier.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (3 children)

I'll read the full article later, but based on the abstract, it doesn't sound promising. Maltose is readily absorbed being a simple sugar while amylose is a multi-sugar (and one of the components of starch) that has to be broken down first in the digestive tract, so I don't think those are comparable.

Based on your ref, I’m not convinced that this is truly the case though.

What you are essentially saying here is that you don't believe sugary drinks will spike your blood sugar level.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

There is this study about different kinds of processing with alpha-amylase. The relevant data is in Figure 2, control (C in the figure) was just an oat-water slurry that was heated for some time, En is with the addition of amylase. The rest is about exploring different processing techniques.

It doesn't compare starch-sugar ratio during digestion tho, not sure if there are any studies that do that. But higher initial maltose content means a higher spike.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (8 children)

Nice strawman you got going there, but I never said anything about calories. It's about sugar.

Your uptake of sugar is not equal across all forms, but varies by the underlying sugar. The rate of uptake is measured with the glycemic index, the higher, the faster the uptake. Lactose has a GI of around 45, sucrose of 65 and maltose of 105. Maltose lets your blood sugar level spike significantly more than the others which leads to a more significant crash which induces hunger, irritability, fatigue, and overeating.

Coke is a lot more sugar-dense than milk (more than double the density) and coupled with the presence of a higher GI sugar, it's more of a snack than a refreshing drink.

Additionally, the controlled enzymatic conversion by adding amylase breaks down a lot more of the oat starch than what would normally happen while eating and digesting, so my point still stands.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Swap use cases of rice and soy milk and it's me.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (12 children)

Oatly adds amylase to convert oat starch into maltose. The result is that the sugar content is about that of Coca-Cola while they still write "unsweetened" or "no added sugar" on their sassy packaging because it's technically true.

It's good for a dash into your coffee, but I wouldn't suggest it as a daily substitute due to the sugar content.

view more: next ›