tim.tdj

Hi Studiot Thank you very much for your reply. So, am I correct that cellulose and lignin are outside of the four categories that I mentioned (Sugars, Fibers, Starches and Polyols)? Or do they perhaps count as fibers? Is it possible that coconut flour contains any cellulose or lignin? Thank you very much Kind regards Tim

Hi CharonY Thank you very much for your reply. I have read that starches can vary quite a lot in their Glycemic Index. I therefore suspect that it may be best when looking at the nutrient lists on British food packaging (where fiber is not treated as carbs) in order to calculate "net carbs" to count the total of the carbs listed unless there are polyols in the ingredients. It is easy to find lists of polyols on the Internet which give their GIs. Can anyone here confirm to me that there do not exist any edible carbohydrates other than Sugars, Fibers, Starches and Polyols? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Studiot Thank you very much for the new information you have provided. No, I have no reason to think that there is anything nasty in it. I am just very interested to know what non-sugar carbohydrates are in the coconut flour. I am actually trying to estimate how much "net carbs" are in the coconut flour so that I can roughly predict what effect it will have on my blood glucose. Without a complete breakdown of the carbohydrates, this is not easy. Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Studiot Thank you very much indeed for your recommendations. To clarify, do you mean that in the UK, they would have to tell you if the 11.1g consisted of anything other than starch? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Studiot Thank you very much indeed for your very informative reply. I will check out the NDSU link you provided. How sure are you that the 11.1g is all starch and nothing else? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Studiot Thank you very much. The manufacturer of the flour is called Lucy Bee. The following is copied and pasted from their website. https://lucybee.com/products/organic-coconut-flour-500g Ingredients 100% Organic Coconut Flour Typical Values Per 100g Energy (kj) 1757 Energy (kcal) 420 Fat 11.3g of which Saturates 10.1g Carbohydrate 27.2g of which Sugars 16.1g Fibre 36.5g Protein 15.8g Salt 0.3g Iron 7.44mg Potassium 2322mg Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Studiot Thank you very much for your reply. I am currently looking at a packet of coconut flour and in the nutrition list (given per 100g), it says the following: Carbohydrates 27.2g of which sugars 16.1g It is a British packet so the fiber is counted separately to the carbohydrates. To be honest, I am not sure I fully understand what you are saying, Studiot, but I think you seem to be saying something which if applied to the coconut flour would say that there are 27g of carbohydrate molecules and that each molecule consists of a sugar molecule with something else bonded to it and that if that something else was stripped away from the sugar molecules, the sugar molecules alone would be 16.1g. Am I correct? In the case of the coconut flour, what actually is the something else? Thank you very much.

Ok. Thank you very much.

Hi Chenbeier Thank you very much for your reply. Aren't these toxic? I very much doubt they would be in food. Am I wrong? Hi Bufofrog Thank you very much for your this information. It may help.

Hi Bufofrog Thank you very much for your reply. However, it does not fully answer my question. I would still very much like to know what carbohydrates do not fall under any of the four categories I mentioned in my original post. Does anyone here know? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Everyone Often, when I am looking at Nutrition Facts labels, I find that the totals given for the different types of carbohydrate listed in the carbohydrate section do not fully add up to the total of all carbohydrates. This suggest to me that there are one or more types of carbohydrate which never get listed. Can anyone here therefore tell me if there are any carbohydrates which do not fall under any of the following four categories: Sugars, Fibers, Starches and Polyols. Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Swansont Thank you very much for your reply. In answer to your first question, I suppose it is a mixture of both. It is medical in that I believe it merits a discussion about the different functionalities of sexualizing hormones versus puberty blockers. So far as a link to the story is concerned, I saw it on this evening's news on TV. I will now try to find a link to a written article that mentions the male hormones and will then get back to you. EDIT: I have found the following link to a recent news article about the case which mentions the male hormones: https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/former-transgender-man-suing-gender-22800014 For more up-to-date news on the case, a search on Google for "Keira Bell" will give plenty of results. EDIT 2: Another answer to your first question has just occurred to me. It is also medical in that I believe it merits a discussion about the complex psychology of the case which unfortunately, some people have over simplified.

Hi Everyone In my Opinion, the verdict of the Keira Bell case is the result of a horribly confused situation. According to the BBC News, she was given both puberty blockers and male hormones. In my view, it was obviously very wrong to give her male hormones but I think it was entirely right to give her the puberty blockers because they are reversible. I think that this case has caused terrible unnecessary damage to the cause of gender dysphoric children who will probably now be forced to irreversibly develop in the way they do not want to develop. If I was the judge, I would have penalized the Tavistock Centre for giving Keira Bell the male hormones but I would have very clearly and emphatically stipulated that there should not be any restrictions placed on the use of puberty blockers. What does everyone think? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Everyone I have read on some websites that the supplement Diindolylmethane lowers Estrogen and raises Testosterone and I have read on other websites that it does the exact opposite to this. What is the truth? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

I have had an email conversation with an elderly person that i know and she has told me that she has already had Covid19 and that her symptoms were mild. She says that she has not had a proper test for Covid19 but her doctor diagnosed her with Covid19 based on her symptoms. Could her doctor have got it wrong?

Hi Zapatos Thank you very much for your reply. They are saying that a vaccine for Covid19 is still a year away which I think is too long for the economy. I hope you are right about it ebbing and flowing so that restrictions can be lifted when it first ebbs. I then very much hope that the next flow will be much smaller than the first. Is it possible that artificial intelligence could massively speed up the progress towards a vaccine?

Hi StringJunky Thank you very much for your reply. I think that I agree that it needs to be graduated to some extent in order not to overload the hospitals but there does need to be some infection between non-vulnerable people in order to achieve herd immunity. However, the longer it takes, the worse it is for the economy and therefore the greater is the risk of a dystopian collapse of civilised society as we know it.

EDIT: Please note that I posted this message as the first in a new thread I created. However, soon afterwards, a moderator merged it with this thread. Hi Everyone To begin with, some people in the UK Government were saying that we need to achieve "herd immunity" in order to eradicate Covid19. However, recently, they have gone off the idea and are increasing the restrictions somewhat. However, I personally can't actually see how Covid19 will ever be eradicated without herd immunity. My reasoning is as follows: Let's say, as a result of really tight restrictions, we get to a situation whereby we believe we have eradicated Covid19. We then, as a result of believing we have eradicated it, lift all of the restrictions. As a result of the restrictions, most of the population will still not be immune to Covid19. If we truly have eradicated Covid19 then this is not a problem. But what if we are mistaken and there is still a small amount of Covid19 left? As soon as this hits the general population (who mostly are still not immune) it will cause a new surge in infections. What do you all think? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi Everyone If you are asked to assign the colours red, yellow and Blue (listed in no particular order) to the shapes triangle, square and circle (listed in no particular order), then which colour do you assign to which shape? You may at this point wish to pause reading this post while you consider your own personal answer to this question. I personally, strongly believe that there is no "correct" answer to this question and it is purely subjective. However, the teachers at the Bauhaus believed that the following correlations are the correct correlations: Triangle = Yellow Square = Red Circle = Blue My personal answer (which I came up with before knowing the "correct" Bauhaus answer) is as follows: Triangle = Red (sharpest shape, sharpest colour) Circle = Yellow (like the Sun) Square = Blue (boring shape, boring colour) Would the fact that my answer is different to the Bauhaus answer make me a bad Bauhaus student? Does anyone here know of any neurological, psychological or any other scientific reasons why the Bauhaus answer is the "correct" answer? Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

Hi everyone. If the entire Amazon rainforest burns down, will we all find it noticeably harder to breath? Will it be like we are all at a higher altitude?

Hi Phi Thank you very much for your reply. Correct me if I am wrong but what you generally seem to be saying is that salt has a tendency to dehydrate you. Am I correct? Is it perhaps the case that there are some circumstances when salt dehydrates you and other circumstances when salt aids hydration?

Hi Phi Thank you very much for your reply. Unfortunately, I can't find the original article I read but I have just found another one which says something similar. It basically states that as a result of osmosis, extra salt in your blood sucks water out of your cells. The other article went on to say that you pee out the water that has been sucked out of your cells. You can see the article I have just found here: https://sciencing.com/drinking-salt-water-dehydrate-you-6454208.html

Hi Everyone There is something which confuses me. I have read that if you add salt to water, it helps with hydration. I have also read that adding salt to water makes you pee more. Wouldn't this cause dehydration? How can both of these statements be true? I would be very grateful to anyone who can remove my confusion about the relationship between salt and hydration. Thank you very much. Kind regards Tim

What if i want to be as close to 100% as i can get that none of my data will be corrupted? Surely If I just backup to one other drive, I am still a bit vulnerable?

Hi Koti Thank you very much. Why do you think that RAIDs are useless in home environments?