There is no Spoon
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 717
- Type of diabetes
- I reversed my Type 2
- Treatment type
- Diet only
I'm being down right obtuse.I think you are being a tad selective
But there is a serious point behind it all we do not know from the OP
Mail on Sunday article about David Unwin and bananas, we have the quote:
So does sugar become a poison to type 2 diabetics? 'That's not supported by the evidence,' answers Prof Kar.
We do not know what David Unwin means when he says "poison" I believe we can with a high degree of certainty presume that it is poison as it is commonly accepted to be lethal. Similarly with Prof Kar's response I believe in this context he is also talking about the commonly accepted definition of poison as lethal.
But I can not be certain that both men,I assume there men, have the same definition in mind but it seems likely.
The OP presumes to think he knows how both men define the term poison even though he himself after citing 6 definitions presumes to present an agreed upon definition for us to use by cherry picking the aspects of the definition that suit the proposition of the post sugar is a poison. (@pdmjoker not having a go at you.)
I don't think your argument holds up.
The premise that "So, essentially something that causes harm." is making assumptions that both men agree on this to be the definition, which is highly unlikely when "poison" is used in conversation.
When a discussion start by defining something from the dictionary to make your argument you know you are on shaky ground, when you cherry pick the bits to suit what "you think" someone else means in a quote then:
You are in earthquake county.