Comments on: Medical and Psychological Studies for June

By: Randy M

Randy M — Thu, 20 Jun 2013 23:00:37 +0000

That’s not entirely fair, Scott. You have to divide that good amongst all the people who have and will contribute to the eventual increase in lesbian-life-years (weirdest unit ever).
Or else any burger flippers he might know are responsible for keeping every one of a billion people alive by feeding them once.

Report comment

By: Romeo Stevens

Romeo Stevens — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 00:51:55 +0000

interesting. thanks for the links.

Report comment

By: Kibber

Kibber — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 22:53:58 +0000

Right, this is a review from 2009, here’s a 2010 study that states otherwise: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20705894, here’s a 2012 one: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22316633

Report comment

By: Romeo Stevens

Romeo Stevens — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 21:58:37 +0000

Regarding the passive diffusion of TiO2 the EU Scientific Committee on Cosmetics and Non-Food Products (SCCNP)46 published a paper based on studies with micro- and nano-sized material. Herein they state that these particles remain on the skin surface or on the outer layer of the stratum corneum and do not penetrate into or through the living skin.47–49 Confirmation was obtained with studies on human, porcine or murine skin50–53 for particles within a size range between 10 and 100 nm. These data were recently confirmed by the outcome of an EU project (NanoDerm). Here, TiO2 are only found in the top layer of the stratum corneum and the openings of the hair follicle.54 Similar results were obtained for ZnO.50,55 Just recently two studies on ZnO56 and TiO2,57 were published; ZnO penetration was investigated in vivo with human volunteers and located the particulated materials only on the skin surface and their accumulation in skin folds and/or hair follicles.56 In vitro measurements of the penetration of TiO2 particles between 20 and 100 nm showed the nanoparticles only in the top 3–5 layers for all skin samples used (porcine skin, healthy human skin and human skin grafted on a severe combined immuno-deficient mouse model).57

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2835875/

Report comment

By: Scott Alexander

Scott Alexander — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 21:08:42 +0000

Deiseach: It seems possible to me that this is something hormonal, and that finding out exactly what might lead to a treatment.

Report comment

By: Deiseach

Deiseach — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 21:00:14 +0000

Scott, unless these studies are going to lead to some conclusion that being a lesbian has a definite genetically-associated risk of obesity (the same way it might do with breast cancer or diabetes, for instance), then it’s nothing more than a curiosity. “Hm, gay women are slightly more likely to be fat than straight women”.

“Suppose there’s a 10% chance this study leads to a solution that makes 10% of lesbians normal weight instead of obese.”

Because there certainly aren’t lots of campaigns about adult obesity, child obesity, the obesity epidemic, etc. etc. etc. already being instituted? Fat taxes on sugary drinks and fast foods proposed? What do you propose – a special Lesbian Diet? And how will that be different to any other kind of diet? Unless it will mean that doctors might treat obese lesbian patients by prescribing drugs to help them lose weight (ah, the magic goal which isn’t yet achieved – the fat melting pill!) rather than just tell them “Eat less, exercise more” like the rest of the population?

I admit, it would be wonderful to get the medical profession to listen to women when they describe their symptoms, rather than tune them out and hand out a canned recommendation. If I thought that would work, I’d claim to be a lesbian myself (maybe then, a male gynaecologist would believe me when I tell him that no, these are not normal periods and not brush me off with ‘ah, you’ll be fine when you go through the menopause’).

Report comment

By: Kibber

Kibber — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:40:22 +0000

Are we really turning this thread into a sunscreen comparison?

Also, I just happen to know that the sunscreen you mentioned uses nano-particles of ZnO and TiO2, and the science is still not settled on the safety of that; furthermore, the particles do not appear to be coated, which, as far as I know, can make them chemically active in some environments.

Report comment

By: Kibber

Kibber — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:27:27 +0000

> This suggests to me that it’s possible to be malnourished while fat.

While I would definitely agree to that claim, your link does not seem to support it. All the deceased people from the list appear to have died from various obesity-related causes. While some of them were indeed on a strict diet shortly before or at the time of death, that by no means makes the diet responsible for it. Brief investigation suggests that the only man from the list claimed to have “literally starved to death” (Michael Edelman) has suffered from congestive heart failure and pneumonia, and neither conditions would make you feel like you’re starving to death (thus not supporting Eliezer’s hypothesis).

Report comment

By: Romeo Stevens

Romeo Stevens — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:21:32 +0000

also I didn’t mean to include a referral link, no idea what it is for. You can search “eltamd sunscreen spray” to avoid it.

Report comment

By: Romeo Stevens

Romeo Stevens — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 18:20:30 +0000

Thank you for editing the post.

I’d still apply sunscreen to your face as 90+% of skin aging is photodamage. I did some cross referencing on the effects of various types of sunscreen and discovered that [this](http://www.amazon.com/EltaMD-Sunscreen-Spray-Fluid-Ounce/dp/B003VL2RYM/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=W64759BLFFLL&coliid=I17RQ87B0L6UPO) is the best combination of usability and non-cancer, non-acne inducing.

Report comment