Effective for what? Body composition? Fitness? If the latter, please explain why all elite endurance athletes do the overwhelming majority (>95%) of their training at low intensities. If the former, well, elite endurance athletes sure aren't fat.
First, I would like to see a source for your 95%. That sounds fishy. Almost every sport I can think of incorporates high intensity interval training and did before it became common for the layperson to incorporate in exercise regimens.
Second, what elite athletes do often does not translate to what laypeople can and should do. Most elite athletes have a tremendous gene advantage over other people, not to mention the time, energy, diet, coaches, etc., that allows them to push beyond what the average person can tolerate. It's almost ridiculous to say, "Micheal Phelps does xyz in the pool and you should too if you want to improve your health in the most efficient way possible."
What is the cutoff for elite athletes vs non-elites? A 5 minute mile? 6 minute mile? Why would there be a discontinuous jump between what a lay person should do versus a profesionally athlete? Sure, volume and intensity would be scaled back but type of exercise wouldn't be all that different.
See https://bodyrecomposition.com/training/endurance-training-me... for an example. The German track cycling team does 90+% of their training at low intensities. For an event lasting 4 minutes. The simple fact is that at the highest level, all pure endurance athletes do mostly aerobic work.
Ok, I missed where you were referring specifically to endurance athletes. You may be correct that endurance athletes do most of their training at lower intensities, although they almost all incorporate some type of higher intensity interval training.
The reason I separate elite athletes from others is that they are genetically different than the average person. To be an elite athlete in a super competitive sport, you are not representative of the normal population. You can likely train harder and longer and most likely have some type of other genetic advantage. It's far better to focus on studies that look at normal people rather than elite athletes.
Anyway, to go back to your original question, asking how HIIT is more effective, you are right that it is not necessarily effective at every endeavor. But literature shows that for the average person, doing 10 minutes of HIIT can be as effective in losing weight, gaining muscle, cardiovascular fitness, etc. as doing something like 30 minutes of low-intensity exercise.
Eating low carb and switching to high carb will cause significant water weight increase due to increased muscle glycogen. On the order of 5-10lbs. It's not fat.
Excess calories can be stored as fat. Carbs that drive high insulin levels end up being converted to fat, and the subsequent low blood sugar level promotes more carb consumption.
This does not happen with protein and fat consumption. If you force yourself to overeat those foods in the absence of carbs, which is not easy, they will be simply eliminated.
You're saying that eating excess calories in the form of fat won't be stored as fat? That's the most efficient pathway and was critical to our survival.
What you're referring to (excess carbohydrates converted to fat) is denovo lipogenesis which is exceedingly inefficient and rare in humans.
My personal experience over several decades aligns with what Taubes explains in the first book I cited. If you want the technical details, you could read it.
You can't get fat on a diet that is strongly deficient in carbs, while it's easy to get fat on a diet containing high proportions of fat and carbs.
The Eskimo subsist on meat and blubber alone. Roald Amundsen ran the experiment on himself and confirmed it.
The group of people you're referencing (Inuit people btw, Eskimo is a slur) have some of the highest obesity rates in the world! The Nunavuts have an obesity rate of 48%!
The ethiopians have a diet of mostly carbohydrates (>70%), and are extremely lean.
Taubes is a bullshit artist who cherry picks data to sell books.
Not the person you addressed, but people are not lab rats whose daily caloric amount is controlled by a lab technician.
We humans in rich countries eat ad libitum. Any dietary intervention that helps us feel less hungry will lead to a reduction in the calories we consume.
It makes sense to only use a single UI toolkit. If some of your stuff is cross platform, it's probably easier to write the single-platform stuff on the cross-platform toolkit than it is to have your devs need to know 2 or more toolkits.
I had to make a web app with a friend and I used Flutter which was absolutely amazing. Easier to work in than react native, and now if I want to work on some Linux desktop apps I have the skills to do so.
Do you have a link to the high mask compliance in Indiana handy? I've honestly looked for this kind of data and haven't been able to find it, and so assumed fairly poor (US-wide at least) mask wear based on anecdotes.
I've posted this elsewhere, but mask compliance in the United States is ~80%. This is of course subject to error, but both where I live and in my travels, most everyone wears a mask. This includes urban and rural areas, some with mandates some without.
Mask usage is generally targeted at indoor spaces. There has been a great deal of research on outdoor spread, and it is nearly non-existent. Mask use outside is like wearing a condom after a vasectomy. Yeah, it might give you a bit more peace of mind, but it really isn't the main thing that is keeping you safe.
That is to say, I believe the survey is targeted for indoor mask usage, as this is also the mandate in most states that mandate mask wearing (while indoors, or outdoors when 6 feet is not possible)
