7 ms·

Do you have a source showing that Cocaine is a natural compound? Perhaps the invisible hand did demonize animal fats and promote sugar but how is that in any w

Do you have a source showing that Cocaine is a natural compound? Perhaps the invisible hand did demonize animal fats and promote sugar but how is that in any way related to my argument?

pazimzadeh 7y ago
Cocaine is found in coca leaves. "The pharmacologically active ingredient of coca is the cocaine alkaloid, which is found in the amount of about 0.3 to 1.5%, averaging 0.8%" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca Can you clarify what your argument is?
- machinelearning 7y ago
  1. So you just contradicted yourself. Cocaine is not a naturally occurring compound but one extracted through a synthetic process specifically to inhibit re-uptake of certain neurotransmitters. 2. On the other hand, sugars have a very important purpose in the body and is present in fruits/vegetables. 3. Like my comment states, prolonged abuse of sugars certainly have negative effects, but as evident from the comment chain, people argue that any and all use of sugar is bad. That's the kind of coarse thinking that I think is harmful.
  - pazimzadeh 7y ago
    How did I contradict myself - I pointed out to you that cocaine is a naturally occurring compound, which it is. "Cocaine is not a naturally occurring compound but one generated through a synthetic process specifically to inhibit re-uptake of certain neurotransmitters" No, cocaine is extracted from coca leaves, it is not synthesized. Refined sugar is also extracted from plants - same thing.
    - machinelearning 7y ago
      You are commenting on an older version of what I commented. I had already corrected that before your comment. I do know that cocaine alkaloids are extracted from plants. Sugar is not necessarily extracted from plants. Its not the same thing. You can simply eat 1-2 servings of most fruit to get the same amount of sugar as a can of soda. It doesn't have to be potent to be found in nature. Still, I don't see where your argument is going, we're arguing about the moderate use of sugar. The incans chewed on coca leaves and it seemed to enhance their long distance endurance. Are you arguing that any amount of sugar is de facto bad?
      - pazimzadeh 7y ago
        I'm not sure what comment you're referring to, but you said "Refined sugar is nothing but sucrose, a natural compound found in plants and fruits" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21119863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21119863 You're the one who mentioned refined sugar. Nowhere have I said that any amount of sugar is bad. On the other hand, the parts of fruit that are beneficial are not the fructose (which is even worse for you than sucrose, which I assume is what you're talking about) but the vitamins, flavonoids and other compounds. We can agree that sugar is not de facto bad. Where we apparently disagree is that refined sugar is not bad. I still eat it - doesn't make it good. I would argue that coca leaves are not de facto bad, but refined cocaine is much closer to bad (though I hear it's really the impurities in street stuff that are bad.)
        machinelearning 7y ago
        1. Re-read the comment you quoted and you'll see what comment I'm referring to. 2. If you need a source to prove that table sugar is sucrose here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_sugar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_sugar 3. Finally, you're close to understanding my point (and what I presume is the orignal commenter's). As far as we know, a moderate amount of refined sugar is not bad once in a while since it helps to increase blood glucose levels like any other source of sugar. (I'm intentionally disregarding the insulin spiking aspect of it here since I've already addressed that in a previous comment.) The fact that you and various other are against moderate sugar consumption (the original commenter's claim), shows how brainwashed the masses are.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Do you have a source showing that Cocaine is a natural compound? Perhaps the invisible hand did demonize animal fats and promote sugar but how is that in any way related to my argument?

pazimzadeh 7y ago

Cocaine is found in coca leaves. "The pharmacologically active ingredient of coca is the cocaine alkaloid, which is found in the amount of about 0.3 to 1.5%, averaging 0.8%" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca Can you clarify what your argument is?

machinelearning 7y ago
1. So you just contradicted yourself. Cocaine is not a naturally occurring compound but one extracted through a synthetic process specifically to inhibit re-uptake of certain neurotransmitters. 2. On the other hand, sugars have a very important purpose in the body and is present in fruits/vegetables. 3. Like my comment states, prolonged abuse of sugars certainly have negative effects, but as evident from the comment chain, people argue that any and all use of sugar is bad. That's the kind of coarse thinking that I think is harmful.
- pazimzadeh 7y ago
  How did I contradict myself - I pointed out to you that cocaine is a naturally occurring compound, which it is. "Cocaine is not a naturally occurring compound but one generated through a synthetic process specifically to inhibit re-uptake of certain neurotransmitters" No, cocaine is extracted from coca leaves, it is not synthesized. Refined sugar is also extracted from plants - same thing.
  - machinelearning 7y ago
    You are commenting on an older version of what I commented. I had already corrected that before your comment. I do know that cocaine alkaloids are extracted from plants. Sugar is not necessarily extracted from plants. Its not the same thing. You can simply eat 1-2 servings of most fruit to get the same amount of sugar as a can of soda. It doesn't have to be potent to be found in nature. Still, I don't see where your argument is going, we're arguing about the moderate use of sugar. The incans chewed on coca leaves and it seemed to enhance their long distance endurance. Are you arguing that any amount of sugar is de facto bad?
    - pazimzadeh 7y ago
      I'm not sure what comment you're referring to, but you said "Refined sugar is nothing but sucrose, a natural compound found in plants and fruits" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21119863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21119863 You're the one who mentioned refined sugar. Nowhere have I said that any amount of sugar is bad. On the other hand, the parts of fruit that are beneficial are not the fructose (which is even worse for you than sucrose, which I assume is what you're talking about) but the vitamins, flavonoids and other compounds. We can agree that sugar is not de facto bad. Where we apparently disagree is that refined sugar is not bad. I still eat it - doesn't make it good. I would argue that coca leaves are not de facto bad, but refined cocaine is much closer to bad (though I hear it's really the impurities in street stuff that are bad.)
      - machinelearning 7y ago
        1. Re-read the comment you quoted and you'll see what comment I'm referring to. 2. If you need a source to prove that table sugar is sucrose here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_sugar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_sugar 3. Finally, you're close to understanding my point (and what I presume is the orignal commenter's). As far as we know, a moderate amount of refined sugar is not bad once in a while since it helps to increase blood glucose levels like any other source of sugar. (I'm intentionally disregarding the insulin spiking aspect of it here since I've already addressed that in a previous comment.) The fact that you and various other are against moderate sugar consumption (the original commenter's claim), shows how brainwashed the masses are.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]