Brankas | Senior Frontend Developer | Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand or Vietnam | Full-Time | REMOTE
Brankas is solving the "last mile" for Open Banking in Southeast Asia.
We are a global team of banking software experts backed by leading fintech venture capital firms in Asia and Silicon Valley. Our vision is to make modern financial services available to everyone, by increasing access and encouraging partnerships between financial institutions and fintech partners.
Brankas is building the next generation of Open APIs and infrastructure for banks, insurance, and other financial institutions across Southeast Asia. Our API-based technology supports real-time disbursements, customer payments by bank transfer, reconciliation, and account statement retrieval for online lenders.
We provide cutting-edge consumer and enterprise focused financial management software and systems. Brankas’ enterprise-focused web apps make use of best-in-breed, modern frontend technologies such as TypeScript and Vue.js (among others), and leverage third-party systems and APIs where possible.
Brankas | Senior Frontend Developer | Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand or Vietnam | Full-Time | REMOTE
Brankas is solving the "last mile" for Open Banking in Southeast Asia.
We are a global team of banking software experts backed by leading fintech venture capital firms in Asia and Silicon Valley. Our vision is to make modern financial services available to everyone, by increasing access and encouraging partnerships between financial institutions and fintech partners.
Brankas is building the next generation of Open APIs and infrastructure for banks, insurance, and other financial institutions across Southeast Asia. Our API-based technology supports real-time disbursements, customer payments by bank transfer, reconciliation, and account statement retrieval for online lenders.
We provide cutting-edge consumer and enterprise focused financial management software and systems. Brankas’ enterprise-focused web apps make use of best-in-breed, modern frontend technologies such as TypeScript and Vue.js (among others), and leverage third-party systems and APIs where possible.
Brankas | Senior Frontend Developer | Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand or Vietnam | Full-Time | REMOTE
Brankas is solving the "last mile" for Open Banking in Southeast Asia.
We are a global team of banking software experts backed by leading fintech venture capital firms in Asia and Silicon Valley. Our vision is to make modern financial services available to everyone, by increasing access and encouraging partnerships between financial institutions and fintech partners.
Brankas is building the next generation of Open APIs and infrastructure for banks, insurance, and other financial institutions across Southeast Asia. Our API-based technology supports real-time disbursements, customer payments by bank transfer, reconciliation, and account statement retrieval for online lenders.
We provide cutting-edge consumer and enterprise focused financial management software and systems. Brankas’ enterprise-focused web apps make use of best-in-breed, modern frontend technologies such as TypeScript and Vue.js (among others), and leverage third-party systems and APIs where possible.
The opposite view: http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/sugar-issues.shtml . Ray Peat's argument is that polyunsaturated fats are the real culprit, and if you look at most sugar laden foods these days, it's difficult to find any that don't also contain a decent amount of PUFA.
You can't tell the damage of a poor diet (or other maladies), simply by looking at videos.
You're also fairly young. A poor diet wrecks your health in a cumulative way.
I'm not saying your diet is poor (I have little data about your diet), I'm just saying it's up in the air with knowing that you eat, "plenty of sugar", and you IG yourself doing calisthenics. Would you agree?
I'm not actually that young, I'm 33. (I also haven't been training very long, about 2 years now) I agree though, I am a sample size of one. There are forums of people who follow Ray Peat's ideas, and some do consume large amounts of sugar, and do really well.
That is young. Health effects (for many things) show up much later, past 50 or even 60. Until then most bodies can compensate for quite a lot of stuff that has gone wrong earlier.
Obesity is a sign for everything related to (and around) obesity. There is plenty of other things that have no connection with obesity, like drugs, alcohol, or too much sun exposure. Aging brings everything to the surface. Obesity is just one specific area with a cluster of diseases.
But think about when people succumb to problems because of poor diet choices: it's not 33. It's more like 65, for heart disease or 45 for Type 2 Diabetes.
Not that you CAN'T see differences, in some instances. I look at former classmates from college and they look horrible when I compare myself (and they know it) - but it's mostly from abuse of alchohol, which I think we can all agree will age you.
> There are forums of people who follow Ray Peat's ideas, and some do consume large amounts of sugar, and do really well.
I haven't heard any reports of people getting teeth issues, assuming they actually look after them. The community there is quite skeptical, and very much for experimenting on themselves, having blood tests taken, etc.
Note that I'm not recommending processed foods either. I actually think it's much harder to eat lots of sugar, if you are only consuming it in non-processed foods.
>There are forums of people who follow Ray Peat's ideas
Sorry, but this sounds like a personality cult. How about following the state of the art dietary advice?
Sure, consensus scientific advice can change over time, and be conflicting at times. But it will always be better than following some individual's opinions.
How about considering different viewpoints? Main stream advice should always be questioned. Also, different diets work for different types of people, and there are 10000 other factors. You can't simply isolate one variable, complex systems don't care about your linear ideas.
There's already consideration for different viewpoints inside the scientific consensus -- that's how it's formed. Yes, it's not perfect but better than its absense.
So, unless those different viewpoints follow the scientific method and are part of the scientific discussion, they are basically either kooks (like Willhelm Reich) or snake-oil salesmen (like, too many to mention).
>Main stream advice should always be questioned.
Usually mainstream advice on pragmatic issues is exactly what works and has been tried and true. (Not to be conflated with mainstream opinion -- on flakey matters, such as personal, political, aesthetic, moral etc subjects).
>Also, different diets work for different types of people, and there are 10000 other factors. You can't simply isolate one variable, complex systems don't care about your linear ideas.
All those are things that the scientific community knows already. So I don't see their relevance here.
Plus, while "different diets work for different types of people", they are not that different in the end, unless someone has a specific genetic condition. At best, some diets are easier, as a habit, for some people to follow than others (some can count calories, some can cut some specific food more easily, etc). But the ways they work (nutritionally) are the same, and the principles are the same. People are not unique snowflakes.
>That is assuming you are not suffering from a bias towards authoritarian sources. ;)
It's precisely the single person that's the "authoritarian source", and the scientific consensus, formed in a discussion, and under experimentation across the globe, that's the flexible and non-authoritarian source.
Considering only the viewpoints inside the scientific consensus is limited - anyone as you said that practises the scientific method, whether in a formal institution, or not, should be able to have their view point considered. We should also never forget that there are politics in science too, and what's accepted is not always what is correct.
Scientists are subject to the human condition, just like anyone else.
I agree there are many snakeoil salesman, or kooks around. But I don't agree that the mainstream has the most optimal advice. In my personal experience I have been much more successful, in all my pursuits (health, programming, movement) by not following main stream advice, but rather seeking the minority that makes sense to me. In the words of Mark Twain, "The majority is always wrong, and the minority is sometimes right". I think the secret is finding the minority that aren't kooks, or snakeoil salesman. They do exist. I have found a few of them. Take the Ray Peat example. He didn't even know he had forums of people discussing his ideas. He doesn't even actively promote himself, or his ideas at all. I respectfully disagree that main stream advice is the most pragmatic.
I don't think the scientific community embraces the holistic nature of the world enough, as we tend to be dominated by linear thinking. If what you said were true, then we wouldn't have fields like Systems Thinking. It's definitely a niche area in research.
I also disagree about your comments on different diets. I have personally seen people religiously follow different diets, and do very badly on some, and well on others. I also prefer not to make statements like "People are not unique snowflakes" since I don't think we know enough at this stage. We are only beginning to understand the role of organisms in our gut for example, on overall health. I think your arguments here are too simplistic, and do not give a complex system like a human body enough credit. You should know that any simple answers to complex questions tend to be wrong.
Scientific consensus tends to be attached to formal institutions, not so? Formal institutions are then an authoritarian source. It comes from a position of authority. What you're essentially saying is something Government decreed for example, is not authoritarian, became it was enacted by a group of people. Obviously not true. Private individuals are generally less authoritarian, but they no doubt can be too. In this case, I am not aware of Ray Peat at all expressing his opinions as fact, but rather as something to be considered and questioned, like anything else.
Shifting from one culprit to the next would merely further a witch hunt. I in no way want to suppress the search for evidence in this.
However, evidence is pretty high that we could cut sugar and have zero negative effects. The largest cut would be in what people are drinking nowdays. (It is truly baffling to see how much sugar the average person consumes from soda.)
Consider, unless you are drinking multiple glasses a day of coke, you are probably actually quite low in your weekly intake of sugar compared to the average.
Sugar is just an empty calorie, there's plenty of studies that also show that it has no real net negative effect. The problem is when your diet consists primarily of empty calories, then obviously you are going to have health problems, from lack of nutrients. If your diet is nutrient rich, a bit of extra sugar will not do anything bad.
"Nutrients" (according to the parent). The hypothesis being that diabetes is caused by lack of nutrients. But this is clearly false because impoverished countries don't have disproportionately high amounts of diabetes. Not to mention that AFAIK the jury is out on sugar causing diabetes.
So, a "calorie" is just a measurement of energy produced when something is burned. Like, really, that's it.
Proteins have specific uses, and some of them can't be produced by your body, so that would be an example of a "non-empty" calorie. Same thing with lipids. Carbohydrates are, essentially, sugar. (Once they're broken down). Obviously you can use them for energy, and they're useful in that regard, but once you have "enough" carbohydrates to fuel whatever activity you're doing adding more just causes your body to convert them into fat. So, that's why they're considered "emtpy" -- they have no nutritional value other than being converted to glucose.
Your answer is informative, so I can't fault you for that, but I already know this. I asked because "empty calories" is (almost) always uttered in the same breath as either 1) no real information or 2) comparing to other carbohydrates.
I do however take issue with this:
> but once you have "enough" carbohydrates to fuel whatever activity you're doing adding more just causes your body to convert them into fat. So, that's why they're considered "emtpy"
That's true with any calorie. By that definition any calorie you're not using is empty.
Well sure, eating too much of any nutrient is not great. Think of it this way, if you just ate a bag of sugar everyday you'd have energy but be malnourished. Hence why theyre empty.
The same would be true with eating a bag of rice. Is rice empty calories?
I'll say it again: Talking about "empty calories" is in my experience always when masking a lack of real nutritional knowledge. Because when I hear it it's always comparing one sugar with another carb (eg flour), or sometimes even better comparing sugar with honey, as if that is any better.
If what you mean by "empty calories" is foods with only carbs and no proteins or fats, then I agree it could be a useful term. If you mean something else I'd like to know more about your reasoning.
From Wikipedia: "A nutrient is a component in foods that an organism uses to survive and grow. "
I'd say the primary for survival is energy. Sugars (carbs) are very high on that. There are of course secondary nutrients like eg amino acids in protein that are very important.
My opinion ultimately doesn't matter on this. I was just speaking to the saying.
That said, it is trivial to find primary items for survival if we just discuss things you would die without. Consider, water has zero calories, but you would die without it.
But your interpretation of nutrients do color your interpretation of "empty calories". Unless proven otherwise, I'll stand by that it's a useless phrase distracting from the conversation of nutrition.
It is a shortening of "empty [of nutrient providing] calories." This is pretty straight forward. If you were to eat nothing but sugar every day, you would die. Same as if you drank water, which is "empty of caloric or nutritional" content.
Are they worthless? No. They do provide caloric value. But they do not provide any nutritional value. This isn't even really at debate, is it?
You should always google the opposite view points too, and not just consider the main stream opinion on things.
There are forums of people that take the opposite viewpoint, and do very well too. It's best to be open minded. We don't have everything figured out yet.
There are forums of people that take the viewpoint that the world is a disc and that the media is run by shapeshifting lizards, too. That doesn't mean they deserve to be taken seriously.
>"people who think that excess sugar is bad for you"
Parent is referring to people who think polyunsaturated fats are bad for you, though. And what I'm taking issue with is the argument that because there exist 'entire forums' of people who have accepted a claim, their views should be given credence.
And a calorie is just a proxy for energy stored. It will certainly correlate with energy related metrics. Just like kloc will correlate with code related metrics.
However, if you are in position to measure other items, I'd highly suggest it.
There's a difference between 'selfies' and keeping a record of your training towards certain physical skills. I follow a number of people who I feel inspired by, on IG, that share similar videos, and I like to return the favour. If I can do this stuff, then anyone can, I'm not naturally inclined that way. So my goal is to inspire. Plus my skill level is still beginner basically, compared to what some other people can do. :)
Brankas is solving the "last mile" for Open Banking in Southeast Asia.
We are a global team of banking software experts backed by leading fintech venture capital firms in Asia and Silicon Valley. Our vision is to make modern financial services available to everyone, by increasing access and encouraging partnerships between financial institutions and fintech partners.
Brankas is building the next generation of Open APIs and infrastructure for banks, insurance, and other financial institutions across Southeast Asia. Our API-based technology supports real-time disbursements, customer payments by bank transfer, reconciliation, and account statement retrieval for online lenders.
We provide cutting-edge consumer and enterprise focused financial management software and systems. Brankas’ enterprise-focused web apps make use of best-in-breed, modern frontend technologies such as TypeScript and Vue.js (among others), and leverage third-party systems and APIs where possible.
https://brank.as/about#senior-frontend-developer