RC Yu
3Followers
7Following
52Posts
Recent Posts
Claim: The “Living Carnivore” Diet is Good for Weight Loss
Verdict: Broadly true, but misleading
“Within 30 days I lost 20 pounds. JD Vance is also on the diet and you can see how different he looks.”
“The way that you're supposed to eat it is bite for bite. You take a bite of the meat, you take a bite of the sauerkraut”
After Vice President JD Vance credited his weight loss to RFK Jr’s recommended “meat and sauerkraut” diet, the “Living Carnivore” diet has been under the spotlight. But does it really work?
The Good News: Weight Loss is Reasonable
For the goal of weight loss – without considering other issues – and despite no direct evidence on the Living Carnivore diet specifically, it doesn't seem too bad. This largely comes down to the benefits of eating fermented foods. Generally speaking, there are multiple benefits to consuming fermented foods, as shown by a study using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 to 2018.
The study found that each 100 g of microbe-containing foods was associated with reduced BMI, waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, C-reactive protein, plasma glucose and triglyceride, and increased high density lipoprotein cholesterols. The mechanisms of action get a little complicated, but generally include influencing gene expression, slowing gastric emptying and modulation of the gut microbiome.
The carnivore side of the diet is where the problems come in. Purely for weight loss, there is some evidence that they can lead to weight loss and increased satiety.
The Bad News: Nutrient Deficiencies and Cholesterol
A 2026 scoping review focused on the carnivore diet noted these benefits for weight loss, but stressed the “substantial risks” of nutrient deficiencies. Overall, the carnivore diet can lead to deficiencies in thiamine, vitamin C, vitamin D, magnesium, iodine, potassium, calcium and fibre. The deficiency in fibre is also pretty extreme, at less than 1/25th of the adequate intake. It's debatable whether you could rectify these issues by adding fermented foods.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and total cholesterol generally increase, carrying risks of heart disease, and some versions have high sodium, potentially leading to high blood pressure and more.
And it should go without saying that eating “bite for bite” is probably useless, it takes a long time to digest food, relative to actual eating process. It all hits your stomach basically simultaneously anyway.
Overall, the diet – especially fermented foods – could help weight loss, but it’s terrible as an overall diet.
Created: Sep 9, 2026
Is "screen time" bad?
As a parent, I wonder if screen time is bad. I came across this study, that seems to be widely debated.
The study basically analysed some large datasets, to examine whether screen time negatively affected teens (controlling for various factors).
What they found: basically almost no effect.
Caveats:
"screen time" is a huge category: it could include social media doomscrolling, but it could also include doing homework on a computer.
also, the study didn’t separate how screen time may affect different teens differently (e.g. boy vs girl, different ages).
Subsequent papers have delved deeper, and indeed found not all screen time is harmless.
Thoughts:
screen time per se is not necessarily good or bad. We need to look into the specific screen activity.
I still worry about eye sight though (kids staring at screens will have worse eyesight?). Need to explore more papers!
2019 | Amy Orben, Andrew K Przybylski | Nature Human Behaviour | (2019)
Item 1 of 1
Created: Sep 2, 2026
Hot drinks cause cancer
Saw this really interesting article in The Guardian, about a new study linking hot drinks with esophagus cancer.
Apparently this link (between hot drinks and cancer) had already been suspected, as this 2016 WHO note highlights.
Anyway, this is the latest 2026 study that the Guardian article spotlights.
Created: Sep 10, 2026
Does flying increase cancer risk?
Going on a tangent from another Board. We were talking about "space weather" and landed on the question of "flying and radiation".
Found this literature review found that:
aircrew have higher rates of certain cancers, such as melanoma, non-melanoma skin cancer, and breast cancer in female flight attendants, compared to the general population. However, the evidence does not clearly prove that cosmic ionizing radiation alone causes these cancers, because other factors—like disrupted sleep patterns, lifestyle, and exposure to chemicals—also affect risk.
(Quoting the Credo summary)
To me, it sounds plausible. Flight attendants, pilots, and frequent flyers beware!
StarTalkspace weather
Season 17, Episode 48: 3 Ways Space Weather (Possibly) Impacts Your Everyday Life
Hey StarTalkians! Season 17, episode 48 was a sit-down discussion with Neil, Chuck and guest Dr. Lika Guhathakurta, a heliophysicist at NASA. The latter half addressed space weather, coronal mass ejections and the many ways in which the sun can – and does – impact our lives.
Super Solar Storms with Lika Guhathakurta - StarTalk Radio
One of Dr. Guhathakurta’s papers delves into what she calls “everyday” space weather, and overlaps with a lot of the podcast discussion.
Carrington-Like Events
Around 50 minutes into the show, they discuss the so-called “Carrington Event” of 1859, and Dr. Guhathakurta also covers this issue in the paper mentioned above. But as her paper points out, there have been others.
A 1989 space weather event knocked out transformers in New Jersey, the United Kingdom and Quebec, with Quebec also losing power for 9 hours. In 2003, geomagnetic storms caused blackouts in southern Sweden and possibly damaged transformers in South Africa.
3 Everyday Effects of Space Weather
Those events are more dramatic – thankfully, we don’t have that type of thing every day. However, that doesn’t mean space weather doesn’t have everyday impacts.
1: Power Problems
It doesn’t have to be a Carrington-like event for space weather to impact your electricity supply. A paper referenced by Dr. Guhathakurta looked at data on insurance claims for industrial electrical equipment, cross-referenced with space weather conditions. While they struggle to pin down a precise dollar amount for the cost – it’s probably in the billions – they calculate that 500 claims are submitted in the US annually because of space weather.
2: Cosmic Rays During Flights
When you travel by plane, you’re exposed to more cosmic rays – high-energy particles originating in distant events like supernovae. At solar maximum, the sun’s magnetic field actually protects us, but at times of lower solar activity, we’re exposed to more. A study looking at this calculated that flying at high latitudes for 12 and a half hours exposes you to as much radiation as a chest X-ray, or about half that for mid-latitudes.
3: The “Blurry Vision” of Your Satellite Navigation
Dr. Guhathakurta estimates [2] that about a third of the inaccuracy of satellite navigation devices come down to space weather. Irregularities in the ionosphere can refract and scatter their signals, leading to what she calls “blurry vision.” It isn’t a huge effect, but it is definitely something you’ll notice often!
2022 | Christopher Scheibler, Sneh M. Toprani, Irina Mordukhovich | Frontiers in Public Health | (2022)
Item 1 of 1
Created: Aug 17, 2026
Podcasts We Lovecreatine
20g of creatine to boost cognition?
On an episode of Huberman Labs, guest Rhonda Patrick talks about creatine for cognition. When she's sleep deprived, she takes 20g of creatine, and says it helps (could be placebo effect, she says).
I looked up a specific paper that mentions this 20g figure. Interestingly, the paper is a review by the European Food Safety Authority, and it reviews 21 studies.
As the credo summary highlights, the review found:
Two studies suggested short-term working-memory benefits at 20 grams daily, but lower doses and longer use did not reproduce them.
Would be interesting to deep dive into those two studies!
Created: Aug 29, 2026
Ok to let babies cry themselves to sleep?
Came across this study (a small randomised control trial) that tested (a version of) this question.
Basically, they say it's fine. (well, a "gentler" version -- where parents don't completely ignore babies, but wait a few minutes before checking in on crying babies)
The researchers compared two techniques (to put babies to sleep):
(A) "graduated extinction" (parents wait longer and longer before responding to a baby's cries)
(B) "bedtime fading" (bedtime is gradually moved later)
[and a control group, where parents were given basic information]
They were trying to test whether method A (graduated extinction) was harmful (since you let the babies cry by themselves).
Their main conclusion (from the credo summary):
both graduated extinction and bedtime fading led to babies falling asleep faster. The graduated extinction group also woke up less during the night and spent less time awake after falling asleep.
...
After one year, there were no differences between groups in children's emotional or behavioral problems, and no differences in how securely children were attached to their parents
- 2016 | Michael Gradisar, Kate Jackson, Nicola Spurrier | PEDIATRICS | (2016)
Item 1 of 1
Created: Aug 21, 2026
Does “mouth taping” improve sleep?
TLDR: there is some (non-conclusive) evidence mouth taping improves sleep. But if you have trouble breathing through your nose (e.g. have some nasal-blockage condition, or a cold), then give mouth taping a skip.
I’ve been seeing these companies selling mouth tape on instagram — to prevent mouth-breathing when sleeping (which is suppose to help). I have tried them, but I can’t really say for sure if they help me.
Found this aptly titled 2025 review “Breaking social media fads and uncovering the safety and efficacy of mouth taping in patients with mouth breathing, sleep disordered breathing, or obstructive sleep apnea: A systemic review” .
What the review looked at?
The paper reviewed 10 other studies – that tested either mouth tape, mouth-sealing patches, or chinstraps.
Those study participants were mostly sleep-clinic patients. (So unclear whether the findings apply more generally)
It wasn’t a meta-analysis, as the 10 studies weren’t similar enough. The review authors also rated the 10 studies’ methodology poorly (in terms of ability to draw generalised findings).
(So all-in-all, take the results (below) with a pinch of salt!)
What the review found? (My interpretation of the findings: check out the credo summary yourself!)
Some (weak) evidence that mouth taping reduces sleep apnoea.
Some evidence mouth taping reduces snoring and “oxygen desaturation” (when blood oxygen go below a certain level)
Mouth tape likelier to be effective if used with a jaw device.
Some of the studies excluded people with “nasal obstruction” (which makes sense). So we can’t say mouth taping helps these people (which isn’t surprising).
Created: Aug 26, 2026
I should probably drink more coffee
Think coffee is a bad habit? Research actually suggests otherwise. This umbrella review of 218 meta-analyses concludes that 3-4 cups a day is associated with lower risk for heart disease and all-cause mortality. Check out the source to read more!
- 2017 | Robin Poole, Oliver John Kennedy, Paul Roderick | BMJ | (2017)
Item 1 of 1
Created: Aug 9, 2026
Tldr: "screen time" broadly speaking not inherently good or bad, depends on the specific activity (including social media for e.g.).
Is "screen time" bad?
As a parent, I wonder if screen time is bad. I came across this study, that seems to be widely debated.
The study basically analysed some large datasets, to examine whether screen time negatively affected teens (controlling for various factors).
What they found: basically almost no effect.
Caveats:
"screen time" is a huge category: it could include social media doomscrolling, but it could also include doing homework on a computer.
also, the study didn’t separate how screen time may affect different teens differently (e.g. boy vs girl, different ages).
Subsequent papers have delved deeper, and indeed found not all screen time is harmless.
Thoughts:
screen time per se is not necessarily good or bad. We need to look into the specific screen activity.
I still worry about eye sight though (kids staring at screens will have worse eyesight?). Need to explore more papers!
Created: Sep 2, 2026
Autism rates probably not rising
Thought this study (a systematic review) deserved its own post. The review concluded:
About one in every 100 children worldwide is diagnosed with autism, and this number has gone up over time, mostly because people are more aware of autism and better at identifying it.
The review covered:
71 studies from 34 countries ... covering 99 different estimates of autism prevalence.
(Quotes from the Credo summary or the study.)
The point is, we aren't actually facing spike in autism -- whether due to vaccines or otherwise.
- 2022 | Jinan Zeidan, Éric Fombonne, Julie Scorah | Autism Research | (2022)
Item 1 of 1
Created: Aug 20, 2026