Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2023 July 27
| Miscellaneous desk | ||
|---|---|---|
| < July 26 | << Jun | July | Aug >> | July 28 > |
| Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives |
|---|
| The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
July 27
editgreen tea and filtered coffee
editWhat do they mean by this question in the article below "while ensuring adequate calcium intake", is there a reason why they say that? Just trying to understand what they mean by having green tea and filtered coffee in moderate consumption "while ensuring adequate calcium intake"? regular moderate consumption of green tea or (filtered) coffee while ensuring adequate calcium intake https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Healthy_diet#Optimal_diet 2001:8003:6152:8101:E118:B3FC:91E7:1B5 (talk) 02:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Some studies link caffeine consumption with negative effects on calcium metabolism, possibly related to caffeine increasing loss of calcium in the urine, and decreasing calcium absorption in the body. Over time, having less calcium available could cause bone loss. However, the effect of caffeine is weakened in individuals who are getting enough calcium in their diet (e.g., 1,000 to 1,200 mg from total of food and supplements). Caffeine may very modestly reduce calcium absorption (by about 4 mg of calcium per cup of coffee), but this can be offset completely by adding 1–2 tablespoons of milk to your coffee.
- "Coffee, Tea and Bone Health - American Bone Health". americanbonehealth.org. 5 December 2016.
- But, I don't see why filtered coffee should be differentiated from unfiltered coffee, or green tea from other teas. 136.54.99.98 (talk) 04:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- The source referenced in the sentence in our article after "(filtered)" states, "
High intake of unfiltered coffee (6 cups per day) has been shown to increase LDL-C by 17.8 mg/dL.
" The other referenced source states, "Tea consumption, especially green tea, is associated with significantly reduced risks for stroke, diabetes and depression, and improved levels of glucose, cholesterol, abdominal obesity and blood pressure.
" [My emphasis by underlining -- L.] --Lambiam 08:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)- Okay, thanks. (I guess I should've read the article in question). 136.54.99.98 (talk) 09:01, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- The source referenced in the sentence in our article after "(filtered)" states, "
uh
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
why should we use 'mainstream media' even though they're allowed to lie legally Tetrasgetras (talk) 12:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, what? --Jayron32 17:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I meant citations from mainstream media, at least all of them do have political biases, or that they're basically lying even legally, of course. Tetrasgetras (talk) 17:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by lying. Can you provide a specific example? As far as I know, most mainstream media sources are trying to find correct information, and do a pretty good job of it. When my local newspaper reports on an upcoming road closure, or lets me know about a traveling broadway show visiting a theatre, or when a TV station tells me that it's going to rain later today, I find they aren't lying about any of that. --Jayron32 17:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Considering that corporate media has a hierarchical structure this renders them easily controllable, rendering the idea of big media as "reflective" of public opinion as highly suspect. Many perceive it as little more than a system of control and containment of the population. Since the news agenda is dictated by a very small number of very rich individuals, it has been suggested that the phrase "mainstream" would be more accurate if replaced by a label which respected the plutocratic agenda it promotes Tetrasgetras (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- So, I think you have misunderstood the purpose of this forum. This is not the "complain about politics" forum. This is a reference desk where we ask for help finding sources to answer questions. It's clear that's not your purpose here. Please don't do this again. --Jayron32 17:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Considering that corporate media has a hierarchical structure this renders them easily controllable, rendering the idea of big media as "reflective" of public opinion as highly suspect. Many perceive it as little more than a system of control and containment of the population. Since the news agenda is dictated by a very small number of very rich individuals, it has been suggested that the phrase "mainstream" would be more accurate if replaced by a label which respected the plutocratic agenda it promotes Tetrasgetras (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by lying. Can you provide a specific example? As far as I know, most mainstream media sources are trying to find correct information, and do a pretty good job of it. When my local newspaper reports on an upcoming road closure, or lets me know about a traveling broadway show visiting a theatre, or when a TV station tells me that it's going to rain later today, I find they aren't lying about any of that. --Jayron32 17:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- I meant citations from mainstream media, at least all of them do have political biases, or that they're basically lying even legally, of course. Tetrasgetras (talk) 17:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)