Brexit process

Discussion of the latest Peak Oil news (please also check the Website News area below)

Moderator: Peak Moderation

User avatar
ReserveGrowthRulz
Banned
Posts: 735
Joined: Sun May 19, 2019 8:00 am
Location: Colorado

Post by ReserveGrowthRulz »

Has anyone watched this british take on Brexit, Brexit: The Uncivil War and if so, care to venture an opinion on it from those who participated in the process?
woodburner
Posts: 4127
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:45 pm

Post by woodburner »

LJ, if you have the time (and it’s quite a bit of time) to watch Lustig’s lecture, it shows that rather than stress causing the appetite problems, it is the bio-chemistry of the food causing the metabolic stress.

A major difficulty is that the crap food appears to be cheap. Where people in the US have been able to convert to a better diet, their medical expenses have fallen to the extent that it was costing less overall. That’s a problem as the US medical industry doesn’t get such a big income. So it’s a good idea to keep people eating cheap crap, and selling them treatments.
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

I do not doubt for a moment the prevalence of poor food types available to people in the contribution to obesity levels. However, stress does indeed, all other things being equal, tend to raise set point appetite on average in most vertebrates and particularly in higher order mammals including humans. The research evidence for this is well documented.
Last edited by Little John on Thu Jan 02, 2020 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:Has anyone watched this british take on Brexit, Brexit: The Uncivil War and if so, care to venture an opinion on it from those who participated in the process?
It's Remainer propaganda disguised as an "objective" dramatization of events.
woodburner
Posts: 4127
Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 10:45 pm

Post by woodburner »

Little John wrote:I do not doubt for a moment the contribution of poor food types available to people in the contribution to obesity levels. However, stress does indeed, all other things being equal, tend to raise set point appetite on average in most vertebrates and particularly in higher order mammals including humans. The research evidence for this is well documented.
Maybe, but as the editor of the Lancet pointed out, at least 50% of reports from studies are either unintentionally, or intentionally misleading or wrong. Most vertebrates (humans excepted) do not naturally over eat. Only those experimented on in labs seem to exhibit this problem when the experiment was to demonstrate such.
To become an extremist, hang around with people you agree with. Cass Sunstein
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

woodburner wrote:
Little John wrote:I do not doubt for a moment the contribution of poor food types available to people in the contribution to obesity levels. However, stress does indeed, all other things being equal, tend to raise set point appetite on average in most vertebrates and particularly in higher order mammals including humans. The research evidence for this is well documented.
Maybe, but as the editor of the Lancet pointed out, at least 50% of reports from studies are either unintentionally, or intentionally misleading or wrong. Most vertebrates (humans excepted) do not naturally over eat. Only those experimented on in labs seem to exhibit this problem when the experiment was to demonstrate such.
To be more precise, Woodburner, short term acute stress will lead to elevated levels of adrenaline, which triggers a lower set point appetite. But, more chronic, long term stress will lead to elevated cortisone levels, which triggers a higher set point appetite. Poverty is associated with chronic long term stress.

I should also say, this knowledge is based on studies from such fields as evolutionary biology/psychology and is what might be described as "pure" research conducted for its own sake as opposed to research conducted in the medical profession which, I am quite prepared to concede, may be sometimes tainted by conflicts of interest.
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:
Little John wrote:
ReserveGrowthRulz wrote:Has anyone watched this british take on Brexit, Brexit: The Uncivil War and if so, care to venture an opinion on it from those who participated in the process?
It's Remainer propaganda disguised as an "objective" dramatization of events.
If you don't mind educating me, how was it Remainer propaganda?
1) Leave voters were represented in the drama almost entirely as uneducated and poor. The implication being they were easily influenced by the campaign.

2) The drama gave far too much credence to a red bus with a slogan on it in terms of swaying the Leave vote. There is no solid evidence to support this. But, it has been persistent a trope of the campaign to overturn Brexit since the day of the referendum result. This drama merely continues that trope. Again, via the constant implication that Leave voters, being stupid and uneducated, were "fooled" by the Leave campaign.

3) Far too much focus was placed on Cummings, who was characterized in the drama as being some kind of Machiavellian genius. Whilst, simultaneously, most of the other portrayals never ventured beyond simple-minded and obvious parody and cliche, especially those of Farage and Banks as "louts". The reason for the above, I suspect, is because fewer bullshit characterizations could be plausibly constructed about Farage because the public had already seen through most of the anti Farage propaganda. Cummings, meanwhile, was still a relatively unknown figure and so could be more easily manipulated in dramatic terms.

4) The closing footnotes of the drama which made mention of the electoral commission were politically biased in favour of remain.

5) More circumstantially, Channel 4, which commissioned the drama, is institutionally rabidly pro-remain - as is Benedict Cumberbatch, the lead actor in the drama.

In short, the drama tread a very delicate tightrope. One in which leave voters could not be portrayed as knuckle dragging xenophobic morons (another favorite trope of the Remain campaign) for fear of alienating over half of the country even more than they already have been. Instead, they were characterized as well meaning, but uneducated simpletons who were inevitably duped by the Machiavellian genius of Dominic Cummings.

As I said, it is Remain propaganda. Albeit, of a slightly more subtle variety than Leavers have been mostly subjected to over the last 3 or so years.
fuzzy
Posts: 1388
Joined: Fri Nov 29, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: The Marches, UK

So where are we?

Post by fuzzy »

Any idea what the details currently are? This is worrying. JW has a lot of contacts:

https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2020/01/09 ... -deadline/
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 8851
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:09 am
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

I thought it was already clear we're pretty much locked into BINO territory now? 11 months isn't enough time and no deal isn't an option.
stumuz1
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 10:12 pm
Location: Anglesey

Post by stumuz1 »

User avatar
UndercoverElephant
Posts: 11269
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:00 am
Location: south east England

Post by UndercoverElephant »

clv101 wrote:I thought it was already clear we're pretty much locked into BINO territory now? 11 months isn't enough time and no deal isn't an option.
We could be in a very unfamiliar place politically in 11 months if Starmer makes a decent job of Labour leader and Johnson delivers BINO.
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

clv101 wrote:I thought it was already clear we're pretty much locked into BINO territory now? 11 months isn't enough time and no deal isn't an option.
Here we go... Why is no deal not an option?
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

UndercoverElephant wrote:
clv101 wrote:I thought it was already clear we're pretty much locked into BINO territory now? 11 months isn't enough time and no deal isn't an option.
We could be in a very unfamiliar place politically in 11 months if Starmer makes a decent job of Labour leader and Johnson delivers BINO.
Your assumption being that he can?
User avatar
clv101
Site Admin
Posts: 8851
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:09 am
Contact:

Post by clv101 »

Little John wrote:
clv101 wrote:I thought it was already clear we're pretty much locked into BINO territory now? 11 months isn't enough time and no deal isn't an option.
Here we go... Why is no deal not an option?
Same reasons it hasn't been an option for the last few years. See above in this thread, nothing to be gained in rehashing. Other opinions are obviously available, I just don't think they are credible.
Little John
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 12:07 am
Location: UK

Post by Little John »

clv101 wrote:
Little John wrote:
clv101 wrote:I thought it was already clear we're pretty much locked into BINO territory now? 11 months isn't enough time and no deal isn't an option.
Here we go... Why is no deal not an option?
Same reasons it hasn't been an option for the last few years. See above in this thread, nothing to be gained in rehashing. Other opinions are obviously available, I just don't think they are credible.
Bullshit. The reason it has not been an option in the last 3 years is due to political intransigence. In case you hadn't noticed, politics has changed. Keep this bullshit up and folks like you will get to find out how much it can change still further,
Locked