BYND

A place to talk about speculative investing ideas for the optional Variable Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: BYND

Post by dualstow » Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:27 am

Oh, me too. I wouldn't be surprised if my losers outnumber my winners. Not going to look. O0 But, I do enjoy these speculative nibbles, especially when I am interested in the product.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:32 am

dualstow wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 11:27 am
Oh, me too. I wouldn't be surprised if my losers outnumber my winners. Not going to look. O0 But, I do enjoy these speculative nibbles, especially when I am interested in the product.
Yeah sometimes it is indeed fun to bet on the unicorns. That's part of why when I was doing swing trading I was using small cap growth stocks. Lots of volatility, and if you get in the right stock at the right time they can just take off like a rocket! It's always hard to decide how to get out of one that has taken of like that. I became a big fan of the trailing stop loss for these situations especially since there is no past history to hint at where a stock might find resistance. These stocks can drop just as fast as they shot up.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: BYND

Post by dualstow » Tue Jun 11, 2019 2:09 pm

Heh. Again, I enjoy these little nibbles, but something akin to Murphy's Law -- or the rule that it won't rain if you bring your umbrella -- says that as soon as I start trading with a significant amount of money, my dumb luck will suddenly run out. My solution: keep trading, but only with an insignificant cost.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: BYND

Post by Tortoise » Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:39 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:00 pm
As an aside, although the BYND burgers tasted great, they had the oddest smell prior to cooking. Almost didn't go through with it.
Yes, exactly. Beyond Burgers taste fine, but they have an odd smell that reminds me faintly of a freshly opened can of dog food. I hope they can improve the product over time to get rid of that smell.

Impossible Burgers are the best fake burgers I’ve had so far.
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: BYND

Post by Tortoise » Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:11 pm

MangoMan wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:50 pm
Impossible Burgers are soy-based. Depending on who you talk to, men should avoid soy. I did read an article yesterday claiming that this was a myth, but have read way more taking the other view. Boca burgers (also soy) used to be pretty good, too, but haven't had one in years.
Well, for what it’s worth, I was practically raised on soy-based meat substitutes (for religious reasons), yet a blood test a few years ago indicated my testosterone level was actually above average.

Sample size of one. 8)
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: BYND

Post by dualstow » Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:54 pm

Jainism?
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: BYND

Post by Tortoise » Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:37 pm

dualstow wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:54 pm
Jainism?
No, Seventh-day Adventist Christianity.

The consumption of meat and alcohol aren’t forbidden by the Bible, but Ellen G. White is considered a prophet by the SDA church, and as part of the Temperance movement she advocated a vegetarian and alcohol-free lifestyle (similar to John Harvey Kellogg, who was also an SDA).
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: BYND

Post by dualstow » Wed Jun 12, 2019 4:58 am

Interesting, Tortoise. I was just reading about the Impossible Burger in the WSJ and they mention competitor Morningstar Farms as being founded by Seventh Day Adventists.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: BYND

Post by flyingpylon » Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:43 am

Tortoise wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:11 pm
Well, for what it’s worth, I was practically raised on soy-based meat substitutes (for religious reasons), yet a blood test a few years ago indicated my testosterone level was actually above average.

Sample size of one. 8)
As an aside, testosterone levels and test results can fluctuate quite a bit. You'd probably need a series of tests over a period of time to establish a range. But obviously not worthwhile unless there are issues.
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:47 am

I have a friend that is a dr and did research into the current studies on this and found that there was not enough evidence in the research to suggest any kind of link between soy and testosterone. In other words, as most things you read on the internet that are diet related, the bloggers just twist and make shit up to generate clicks and make money. These things eventually become so wide spread and people hear them enough times that people accept them as truth and spread it further without even verifying that there is any truth behind the claims (see keto, intermittent fasting, anything with the word "toxins" in it, and gluten "sensitivity" for further examples of diet fad falsehoods becoming accepted as truth simply through mass proliferation by clueless, shyster, self-proclaimed "experts" on blogs, the internet, and TV).
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: BYND

Post by flyingpylon » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:00 am

pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:47 am
I have a friend that is a dr and did research into the current studies on this and found that there was not enough evidence in the research to suggest any kind of link between soy and testosterone. In other words, as most things you read on the internet that are diet related, the bloggers just twist and make shit up to generate clicks and make money. These things eventually become so wide spread and people hear them enough times that people accept them as truth and spread it further without even verifying that there is any truth behind the claims (see keto, intermittent fasting, anything with the word "toxins" in it, and gluten "sensitivity" for further examples of diet fad falsehoods becoming accepted as truth simply through mass proliferation by clueless, shyster, self-proclaimed "experts" on blogs, the internet, and TV).
Hey, don't forget about all the BS accepted as truth that is proliferated by governments and big business, they are no better!
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:20 am

flyingpylon wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:00 am
pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 9:47 am
I have a friend that is a dr and did research into the current studies on this and found that there was not enough evidence in the research to suggest any kind of link between soy and testosterone. In other words, as most things you read on the internet that are diet related, the bloggers just twist and make shit up to generate clicks and make money. These things eventually become so wide spread and people hear them enough times that people accept them as truth and spread it further without even verifying that there is any truth behind the claims (see keto, intermittent fasting, anything with the word "toxins" in it, and gluten "sensitivity" for further examples of diet fad falsehoods becoming accepted as truth simply through mass proliferation by clueless, shyster, self-proclaimed "experts" on blogs, the internet, and TV).
Hey, don't forget about all the BS accepted as truth that is proliferated by governments and big business, they are no better!
Yep it's all the same thing, spreading misinformation for profit or to fulfill some other motive. It's just very visible in the diet/nutrition world. If you actually read the scientific research on diet/nutrition you find that the stuff pandered about on the internet and commonly accepted is generally false, greatly exaggerated, or cherry picking something out of the abstract and quoting it out of context. Business and government do the same, they just generally try to hide their tracks a bit better.
Last edited by pmward on Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: BYND

Post by Cortopassi » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:20 am

No doubt when I go Keto/low carb for more than a couple weeks, I have more energy, I lose weight and joints never hurt.

I've just never been able to stick with it 100% for more than about 3 months.

I never eat bread or pasta, but chips and sweets kill me.
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:23 am

Cortopassi wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:20 am
No doubt when I go Keto/low carb for more than a couple weeks, I have more energy, I lose weight and joints never hurt.

I've just never been able to stick with it 100% for more than about 3 months.

I never eat bread or pasta, but chips and sweets kill me.
I'm not saying that you can't lose weight on keto. There is just no difference between keto or any other diet. The law of thermodynamics cannot be manipulated, at the end of the day the only thing that matters is energy in vs energy out (i.e. calories and exercise). Scientific research shows that in a calorie equated diet keto is no more effective than a balanced diet approach. Moreover, cutting out entire food groups for long periods can cause malnutrition in the form of nutrient deficiencies. Personally, I think people are much better off just doing a lower calorie balanced diet if they want to lose weight. Not only is it healthier in it's micro-nutritional makeup, but it's also more sustainable (and that's the most important piece of the pie anyways, because as you pointed out, if you can't stick to a diet what good is it anyways?). Contrary to what bloggers say, unless you have an existing professionally diagnosed medical condition that states otherwise, there is nothing wrong with eating bread or pasta. They are perfectly healthy foods. As in all things, balance is the key, imo. Is it good to eat bread 3x a day 365 days per year? Probably not. Is there anything wrong with eating a sandwich with two slices of white bread, some lean meats, and veggie toppings for lunch a couple days a week? Absolutely not. The actual scientific research shows basically that grandma was right all along. But grandma's advice is not exciting, it doesn't generate controversy and debate, it doesn't generate a cult following, it doesn't generate clicks, and it doesn't generate revenue... so the truth falls on deaf ears. Capitalism.
flyingpylon
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:04 am

Re: BYND

Post by flyingpylon » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:40 am

There's more to health and diet optimization than weight loss. So while it's true that calories in/out is a factor and the laws of thermodynamics cannot be manipulated, IMO that doesn't mean that everything else is automatically irrelevant.

Food and humans are far too complex for there to be a "perfect" diet or universal rules about eating anyway.
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:43 am

flyingpylon wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:40 am
There's more to health and diet optimization than weight loss. So while it's true that calories in/out is a factor and the laws of thermodynamics cannot be manipulated, IMO that doesn't mean that everything else is automatically irrelevant.

Food and humans are far too complex for there to be a "perfect" diet or universal rules about eating anyway.
Totally agree. My point exactly.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: BYND

Post by Cortopassi » Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:58 am

pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:23 am
[there is nothing wrong with eating bread or pasta. They are perfectly healthy foods.
I think that is the one point I'd dispute. If your body can handle it in moderation, sure. If you are a type 2 diabetic and cut carbs out, as far as everything I have read and researched, your blood sugar will be fine. It's only when you add carbs that it becomes an issue. Does that make them 100% bad, no. But moderating them has benefits.

In any event, it should be abundantly clear that something is wrong with either the type or quantity of food when you look at typical Americans and their body size over the past 30 years.
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:07 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:58 am
pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:23 am
[there is nothing wrong with eating bread or pasta. They are perfectly healthy foods.
I think that is the one point I'd dispute. If your body can handle it in moderation, sure. If you are a type 2 diabetic and cut carbs out, as far as everything I have read and researched, your blood sugar will be fine. It's only when you add carbs that it becomes an issue. Does that make them 100% bad, no. But moderating them has benefits.
That was taken out of context. If you look at the words I said just before these I qualified that so long as the person had no pre-existing professionally diagnosed medical issues (meaning diabetes, metabolic syndrome, celiac, etc that are diagnosed by a real dr, not off of webmd). If someone has no medical conditions that state otherwise, then it is perfectly fine and healthy to eat a balanced amount and variety of carbs.
Cortopassi wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:58 am
In any event, it should be abundantly clear that something is wrong with either the type or quantity of food when you look at typical Americans and their body size over the past 30 years.
Agreed 110%.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: BYND

Post by Xan » Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:38 pm

pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:23 am
The law of thermodynamics cannot be manipulated, at the end of the day the only thing that matters is energy in vs energy out (i.e. calories and exercise).
I don't think you can say for sure you know the directionality there. Take for example your body temperature: do you have to carefully regulate how much heat you take in versus how much heat you put out in order to maintain a 98 degree temperature? When you have a cold, do you make sure to take in a little extra heat to get a fever going? Absolutely you don't. Your body has an equilibrium. When it aims for 98 degrees, it hits it. When it aims for more, it hits it. This means that the heat you expel versus retain is primarily a factor of what your body's target temperature is.

Similarly, the your body decides whether to burn or store calories depending on what its target weight is. Some foods (carbs) make your body want to store more. Other foods make it want to store less. For weight purposes anyway, we should be finding out ways to tell our bodies not to want to store as much, and the best way to do that seems to be limiting intake of carbohydrates.
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 14232
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: synagogue of Satan
Contact:

Re: BYND

Post by dualstow » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:03 pm

BYND right back up today, whoohoo!

(Apologies for the on-topic post)

I can’t see buying new shares anytime soon, and good competitors must be right around the corner. However, with Beyond Meat now on shelves at places like Whole Foods, I feel comfortable holding.

They’ve got a good lead for now.
Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:31 pm

Xan wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:38 pm
pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:23 am
The law of thermodynamics cannot be manipulated, at the end of the day the only thing that matters is energy in vs energy out (i.e. calories and exercise).
Similarly, the your body decides whether to burn or store calories depending on what its target weight is. Some foods (carbs) make your body want to store more. Other foods make it want to store less. For weight purposes anyway, we should be finding out ways to tell our bodies not to want to store as much, and the best way to do that seems to be limiting intake of carbohydrates.
Do you have a scholarly source for this claim? If you look in the actual research you will find this all to be false. Foods do not store more or less based on their macro-nutritional make up. It's strictly off of their caloric value. The body is in a constant process of burning and storing. This process goes on 24/7 regardless of what you eat. A calorie can be stored as fat, then pulled right back off 20 minutes later. There are two sides to the math equation, and you have to account for both. But at the end of the day it truly is just a math equation. If on the whole there is a surplus of calories you will have net storage. If there is a deficit of calories there will be a net loss. If they are equal, then things stay the same.

Not to mention that if anything, fats store technically store more of their calories than carbs because fats can be stored as is with little to no processing required. The chemistry involved in turning a carb into a lipid to be stored burns quite a bit of the calories. It's a super inefficient process.

Fats are not better than carbs. Even with what I wrote above, carbs are not better than fats. It's all relative to the diet as a whole, the individuals metabolism, the total calories consumed, and the total calories burned.
Last edited by pmward on Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: BYND

Post by Cortopassi » Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:58 pm

pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:31 pm
Xan wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:38 pm
pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 11:23 am
The law of thermodynamics cannot be manipulated, at the end of the day the only thing that matters is energy in vs energy out (i.e. calories and exercise).
Similarly, the your body decides whether to burn or store calories depending on what its target weight is. Some foods (carbs) make your body want to store more. Other foods make it want to store less. For weight purposes anyway, we should be finding out ways to tell our bodies not to want to store as much, and the best way to do that seems to be limiting intake of carbohydrates.
Do you have a scholarly source for this claim? If you look in the actual research you will find this all to be false. Foods do not store more or less aside from their caloric value. If anything, fats store more than carbs because fats can be stored as is. The chemistry involved in turning a carb into a lipid to be stored burns quite a bit of the calories. It's a super inefficient process. Fats are not better than carbs. Even with what I wrote above, carbs are not better than fats. It's all relative to the diet as a whole, the individuals metabolism, the total calories consumed, and the total calories burned.
Have you read http://garytaubes.com/works/books/good- ... -calories/

and his follow-on book Why We Get Fat? I did a long time ago, cannot quote anything directly, sorry.

There is quite a lot of science that (I'm simplifying here) would show if you put two people in a room for a month and fed one 5000 calories a day from carbs, and one 5000 a day from fats and protein that at the end of the month there will be a significant difference in health and weight between the two.

I understand this is a religious argument for a lot of people, and I have my own views that many may not agree with. You can search on any of low fat/high fat/lo carb/high carb diets and will find adherents to all styles.

--Saturated fat is fine
--Cholesterol is not to be worried about
--I will never take a statin
--I limit carbs where I can
--The standard American diet is built on BS
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:06 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:58 pm
pmward wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 2:31 pm
Xan wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 12:38 pm


Similarly, the your body decides whether to burn or store calories depending on what its target weight is. Some foods (carbs) make your body want to store more. Other foods make it want to store less. For weight purposes anyway, we should be finding out ways to tell our bodies not to want to store as much, and the best way to do that seems to be limiting intake of carbohydrates.
Do you have a scholarly source for this claim? If you look in the actual research you will find this all to be false. Foods do not store more or less aside from their caloric value. If anything, fats store more than carbs because fats can be stored as is. The chemistry involved in turning a carb into a lipid to be stored burns quite a bit of the calories. It's a super inefficient process. Fats are not better than carbs. Even with what I wrote above, carbs are not better than fats. It's all relative to the diet as a whole, the individuals metabolism, the total calories consumed, and the total calories burned.
Have you read http://garytaubes.com/works/books/good- ... -calories/

and his follow-on book Why We Get Fat? I did a long time ago, cannot quote anything directly, sorry.

There is quite a lot of science that (I'm simplifying here) would show if you put two people in a room for a month and fed one 5000 calories a day from carbs, and one 5000 a day from fats and protein that at the end of the month there will be a significant difference in health and weight between the two.

I understand this is a religious argument for a lot of people, and I have my own views that many may not agree with. You can search on any of low fat/high fat/lo carb/high carb diets and will find adherents to all styles.

--Saturated fat is fine
--Cholesterol is not to be worried about
--I will never take a statin
--I limit carbs where I can
--The standard American diet is built on BS
I have not read that book. I find it better to read the research studies themselves as opposed to reading an opinion. Let me be clear here though, I'm not saying I'm anti-keto or anything. If this fits someone's lifestyle, tastes, and motivations then cool. But it is not superior in any way to any other diet. They are all equal as long as calories are equal.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3338
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: https://www.jwst.nasa.gov/content/webbL ... sWebb.html

Re: BYND

Post by Cortopassi » Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:18 pm

pmward,

I respectfully disagree. Calories are not equal. But that's fine. My study is myself and how my body does better when it has less carbs. I assume the studies you are reading don't have conflicts of interest. So many do.
pmward
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 4:39 pm

Re: BYND

Post by pmward » Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:46 pm

Cortopassi wrote:
Wed Jun 12, 2019 3:18 pm
pmward,

I respectfully disagree. Calories are not equal. But that's fine. My study is myself and how my body does better when it has less carbs. I assume the studies you are reading don't have conflicts of interest. So many do.
A calorie is 4.184 joules of energy. Whether that calorie is from fat or carb makes 0 difference it is still 4.184 joules. Therefore, 4.184 joules of energy burned will burn said calorie. A gram of fat has 9 calories and a gram of carb or protein has 4 calories. Please do some research. There is plenty of unbiased research out there and it is quite conclusive. It's a math equation. 3-2 can never equal 3, 3-2 always HAS to equal 1. You can respectfully disagree and say 3-2=3 all you want, but it doesn't make it any more true.
Post Reply