User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Page rendered in 0.9546 seconds
48 querie(s) executed
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Monday, February 03, 2014
Michael Kay opens show on YES with shot at Mike Francesa by throwing Diet Coke in trash can
Aspartame says goodbye forever…
Michael Kay kicked off his gig as Francesa’s replacement on the Yankees’ station Monday with a silent dis to the man who anchored the afternoon programming on the network for a dozen years.
As YES’ cameras focused in on Kay and sidekick Don LaGreca, a bottle of Diet Coke was in clear sight. Unlike Francesa’s shows, the label was still on the bottle.
While Kay began his monologue, he picked up the bottle of soda and deposited it into a trash bin that was raised by LaGreca for the YES lenses to capture. The pair made no mention of it in the opening moments of the show.
Kay was immediately ripped by viewers on Twitter, and when it was brought up to Francesa — who is currently without a simulcast home after his relationship with YES came to an end on Sunday — he dismissed the ESPN-98.7 duo.
...Off the air, Francesa was even more harsh, telling Newsday that Kay and LaGreca’s stunt was a “classless, loser move from two guys I have been burying in the ratings for over a decade.”
If this is what counts as a shot across the bow, Francesa would surely consider the weapon “a peashootah.”
Login to submit news.
BBTF Partner
Support BBTF
Thanks to
Edmundo got dem ol' Kozma blues again mama
for his generous support.
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
Newsblog: OT - 2023 NFL thread
(4 - 1:38pm, Sep 23)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Newsblog: OT - August/September 2023 College Football thread
(85 - 1:27pm, Sep 23)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Newsblog: Omnichatter for September 2023
(493 - 11:45am, Sep 23)
Last: Tom and Shivs couples counselor
Newsblog: Oakland vs. the A's: The inside story of how it all went south (to Las Vegas)
(31 - 8:48am, Sep 23)
Last: Tony S
Newsblog: Qualifying Offer Value To Land Around $20.5MM
(8 - 10:08pm, Sep 22)
Last: Cris E
Newsblog: OT - NBA Off-Pre-Early Thread for the end of 2023
(3 - 9:58pm, Sep 22)
Last: Athletic Supporter's aunt's sorry like Aziz
Newsblog: Republicans propose $614M in public funds for Brewers' stadium upgrades
(33 - 6:48pm, Sep 22)
Last: ReggieThomasLives
Newsblog: Carroll makes more history: 1st rookie to have 25-HR, 50-SB season
(3 - 6:28pm, Sep 22)
Last: ReggieThomasLives
Newsblog: Yankees' status quo under Brian Cashman resulted in 'disaster' season, and a fresh perspective is needed
(5 - 6:25pm, Sep 22)
Last: ReggieThomasLives
Newsblog: Is It Time to Stop Using Scripts on Sports Uniforms?
(10 - 6:17pm, Sep 22)
Last: Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc
Newsblog: OT - NBA Bubble Thread
(4096 - 5:01pm, Sep 22)
Last: Hombre Brotani
Newsblog: As Padres’ season spirals, questions emerge about culture, cohesion and chemistry
(43 - 3:32pm, Sep 22)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)
Newsblog: OT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2971 - 2:21pm, Sep 22)
Last: tell me when i'm telling 57i66135
Newsblog: OT Soccer - World Cup Final/European Leagues Start
(98 - 12:09pm, Sep 22)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale
Newsblog: The ragtag team that saved Darryl Strawberry’s career
(7 - 10:41am, Sep 22)
Last: Cris E
(4 - 1:38pm, Sep 23)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Newsblog: OT - August/September 2023 College Football thread
(85 - 1:27pm, Sep 23)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!
Newsblog: Omnichatter for September 2023
(493 - 11:45am, Sep 23)
Last: Tom and Shivs couples counselor
Newsblog: Oakland vs. the A's: The inside story of how it all went south (to Las Vegas)
(31 - 8:48am, Sep 23)
Last: Tony S
Newsblog: Qualifying Offer Value To Land Around $20.5MM
(8 - 10:08pm, Sep 22)
Last: Cris E
Newsblog: OT - NBA Off-Pre-Early Thread for the end of 2023
(3 - 9:58pm, Sep 22)
Last: Athletic Supporter's aunt's sorry like Aziz
Newsblog: Republicans propose $614M in public funds for Brewers' stadium upgrades
(33 - 6:48pm, Sep 22)
Last: ReggieThomasLives
Newsblog: Carroll makes more history: 1st rookie to have 25-HR, 50-SB season
(3 - 6:28pm, Sep 22)
Last: ReggieThomasLives
Newsblog: Yankees' status quo under Brian Cashman resulted in 'disaster' season, and a fresh perspective is needed
(5 - 6:25pm, Sep 22)
Last: ReggieThomasLives
Newsblog: Is It Time to Stop Using Scripts on Sports Uniforms?
(10 - 6:17pm, Sep 22)
Last: Starring Bradley Scotchman as RMc
Newsblog: OT - NBA Bubble Thread
(4096 - 5:01pm, Sep 22)
Last: Hombre Brotani
Newsblog: As Padres’ season spirals, questions emerge about culture, cohesion and chemistry
(43 - 3:32pm, Sep 22)
Last: Never Give an Inge (Dave)
Newsblog: OT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(2971 - 2:21pm, Sep 22)
Last: tell me when i'm telling 57i66135
Newsblog: OT Soccer - World Cup Final/European Leagues Start
(98 - 12:09pm, Sep 22)
Last: AuntBea odeurs de parfum de distance sociale
Newsblog: The ragtag team that saved Darryl Strawberry’s career
(7 - 10:41am, Sep 22)
Last: Cris E
About Baseball Think Factory | Write for Us | Copyright © 1996-2021 Baseball Think Factory
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
He also compared people who preserve the tradition of not mentioning no-hitters in progress to...Nazis. So there's that.
Idiocracy already had a long reign on YES during the Francessa administration.
Kay might be a bigger blowhard than Francesa (which would make Kay the biggest blowhard in the world) but no way is he dumber. Francesa is dumber than 10 of Tommy Lasorda's dogs.
Diet coke is vile, unhealthy #### anyway.
I dunno, but Cox Sports New England does an afternoon simulcast of Felger and Mazz. NESN simulcasts Dennis and Callahan in the morning. I suspect it is cheap programming for these RSNs.
It must do well in some places, because both major sports networks in Canada (TSN/Rogers Sportsnet) simulcast about 11 total hours of radio each day.
TSN does it for their morning show and afternoon drive time show (for about 4 hours).
Sportsnet does it for their lunchtime hockey show (1hr), their afternoon set (3hrs) and their primetime show (3hrs).
Those afternoon hours are hard to fill without resorting to the usual stuff (poker, darts, EPL magazine shows), so both networks figure they have some popular radio talents (a few of which are also TV guys at other times) and they might as well cash in on them.
That aspartame in Diet Coke metabolizes to methanol. 6 bottles of that and you have consumed more methanol than is permitted in potable water (assuming an average daily consumption). Deadly.
"Some of the things we ingest are directly absorbed and utilized unchanged, like water. But most of what we ingest is metabolized. Aspartame is metabolized. It does indeed break down into aspartic acid, phenylalanine, and methanol. Aspartic acid and phenylalanine are amino acids that we need to survive. Methanol is produced in small amounts by the metabolism of many foods; it is harmless in small amounts. A cup of tomato juice produces six times as much methanol as a cup of diet soda. Methanol is completely metabolized via formaldehyde to formic acid; no formaldehyde remains. Lastly, the formic acid is broken down into water and carbon dioxide. Human studies show that formic acid is eliminated faster than it is formed after ingestion of aspartic acid. So yes, those compounds appear, but so what? We get much larger amounts of the same compounds from our food, and they don’t hurt us."
Artificial things like diet soda still scare me, mind you (and I avoid them on principle), but I'm not sure the methanol thing is such a big deal. Although "sciencebasedmedicine.org" does sound a bit suspicious..
1. Diet soda doesn't have calories.
2. Regular soda has lots of calories.
Therefore, drinking diet soda will not cause you to gain weight, but regular soda will, all else being equal.
Diet soda will also not cause you to lose weight. Consuming fewer calories in total, across all the food and drink you consume, will cause you to lose weight. The amount of weight it will cause you to lose will vary based on certain factors, but it will cause you to lose weight.
Period. That's it. This kind of misinformation
is nothing short of insanity. In fact, it could actually kill someone.
What this quote is missing is that no one drinks a "cup" (8 oz) of diet soda. Its likely that he average diet soda drinker consumes way more than 6 cups daily.
Because NY is supposedly the center of the ####### universe?
The idea that there's a difference between what's "artificial" and "natural" is entirely artificial and arbitrary anyhow, so it's not worth sweating it. Drinking Diet Sodas may cause cancer, but so does eating meat cooked over a fire, living in a brick house, and so on. The downside of all those funky artificial medical treatments is that we live long enough to get diseases like cancer.
I drink one, maybe two cups daily. I don't know anyone who drinks more than that. Now, don't get me started on coffee drinkers...
If you feed them 10 times their body weight daily over a long period, yes.
1 can is a cup and a half. 2 cans is really common, and that's 3 cups. Furthermore, juice cups or glasses are about 4 oz. Yes, it's possible to exceed that, but the most common form of beverage delivery is 4 oz juice, 12 oz soda. That fact alone drives the soda consumption way higher than the juice consumption for the average person.
I guess that means we're all going to be living to 115 years old, eh Brian?
I personally expect cancer rates to rise much more quickly than that; as we get better and better at helping people survive strokes and heart attacks, people will live long enough to die from cancer. This will of course be most pronounced in nations that currently have low life expectancy. As people live longer, they will age into vastly larger numbers of cancers, right?
If you want to avoid cancer, ditch the brick house for wood. That'll help a lot. Stay the #### away from bananas - rife with radioactivity. Don't worry about the diet coke (though personally I prefer beer, which is a plus and minus in health effect).
Good question.
Ben Franklin lived to be 84. John Adams lived to be 90. Thomas Jefferson lived to be 83. J. Q. Adams lived to be 80. James Madison lived to be 85. Yes, these were wealthy people, but they also lived ridiculously stressful lives. To pretend that cancer isn't a modern disease just like Alzheimer's, and autism, is just silly. The things we have put in and on our bodies for the last few generations are taking a toll.
I think the comment above about diet coke not helping you lose weight was referring to studies that have shown that real people that have switched from regular soda to diet soda do not, in fact, lose weight. I think the theory is that people that switch to diet soda almost always replace the calories elsewhere in their diets. I don't know if it's because the diet soda itself monkeys with your appetite or metabolism or something, or if it's just because these tend to be fat people with poor impulse control to begin with.
To me, diet soda is one of the most vile flavors on Earth.
The name "cancer" was coined by Hippocrates, who was diagnosing cases 2400 years ago. We have an Egyptian papyrus from 1600 BC that describes a procedure for treating breast cancer.
It is certainly related to abandoning traditional foods and adopting crap processed western food. The link between processed food and poor health has been well established for over 100 years.
Dinosaurs got cancer. Yeah, more modern things cause certain types of cancer (e.g., lung cancer from smoking went way up then down, but other air pollutants are a big source). Sure, people lived to by 90 in the 1700s, but people also live to be 90 today. Life expectancy is increasing year by year, partially because kids are less likely to die, and partially because adults are living longer.
The use of refined sugars clearly plays a big role in getting tooth cavities - that's really a modern disease. Cancer is as ancient as ####.
Alois Alzheimer diagnosed the disease bearing his name when New York didn't even have a major league baseball team. Considering Ramon y Cajal hadn't figured out effective ways of staining neural tissue until that approximate time that's a pretty good turnaround from assessment to diagnosis.
There are more documented cases of cancer now because more documentation is being done. If you don't look for something you wont find it. Doesn't mean people weren't getting cancer back in the day.
Jefferson had prostate cancer when he died. John Adams' daughter died of breast cancer.
no, because NY is the center of the ####### universe.
I drink at least a liter a day (that's about 3 cans' worth).
If you have one can with each meal, that's a liter right there. It adds up in a hurry.
Don't/can't drink cokes anymore (just as well, of course), but when I did, the higher figure was a lot closer to normal for me. More like 6 cans on workdays.
No, it's enormous prevalence today is easily attributed to its enormous prevalence in animals for the last 80 million years. Humans are more noticably dying of cancer because we're not dying of smallpox, so we have to die of something, and we're far better at figuring out why people died.
Hey Look, they're all flat or going down, except lung cancer, which shoots up, and starts falling once smoking is no longer cool.
So, Denny Crane isn't that far off after all.
I drink my juice out of 4 oz juice glasses in my cupboard. That's not to say I or other juice drinkers will not drink more than that. But when the default delivery system of one is 3 times larger than another, it's likely the average drinker of the one will drink 3 times as much. And when the default time of day to drink one is a much shorter fraction of the day that the other, the consumer of the latter will likely drink more.
The portion issue is is quite true though. As I've been trying to loose a few pounds I found just going from pints to 12 oz beers solved a large amount of the problem. I tend to have the same number of beers with either way, but its less total volume, and significantly fewer calories at the end of the night. 3 pints of a 7.5% IPA is about 900 calories (ouch) 3 bottles is 675. then I switched to more pale ales, and 3 bottles is 525.
Beer week starts on Friday though, so I just need to do a lot more cycling...
I just want to say be careful regarding fruit juices. They are loaded with calories and most people get enough vitamins that the vitamins in the juices don't really improve their health. It's better to actually eat fruit and vegetables than it is to drink juice.
There's a reason why we tell people with diabetes that they should drink orange juice or pop when they are having hypoglycemic episodes.
I'm pretty sure the vessel with the pestle has the pellet with the poison. The chalice from the palace has the brew that is true.
So much this. Eating the fruit will ensure you get all the nutrients it has to offer, including a healthy dose of fiber, much of which is lost in the translation from fruit to juice. Plus many store bought fruit juices have added sugar, over and above what's naturally in the juice. The vast majority of overweight people I know drink a ton of calories in the form of juice, soft drinks, energy drinks, alcohol, or some combination of the above.
I hear people repeat this, but always as "I heard this somewhere". Any actual studies? It seems to me to be the kind of thing that someone just throws out there and it get repeated. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If your body is going to be tricked, wouldn't it get tricked into thinking it got sweets?
I'm certainly not going to claim that I'm average or anything, but I probably drank 8 cans of diet coke a day. Basically, I didn't drink anything else, ever. Rarely drank water, rarely drank alcohol. I certainly did have a diet coke with breakfast. Two before lunch. Probably the equivalent of two at lunch. Another couple in the afternoon and then another couple at dinner. Probably another one after dinner at some point. And some days would be higher, like if I had a long car trip I'd probably get a large at McDonald's or something.
This was pretty consistent for me for about 15 years, I'd say.
The chalice with the phallus and the goo that is blue. Pass it down.
I remember reading about this last year and I know the study was done at Yale, a colleague was involved in doing some of the analysis. That's all I got for ya.
Edit: AHA!
Yep, with breakfast. Or instead of breakfast. (Soda and cold pizza for breakfast is just the best.)
One in the AM, one at lunch, maybe one in the afternoon for a pickup, possibly one at dinner... it's pretty easy to get to 1-2 liters a day without it seeming like you're just guzzling it down. It's not like downing a 2-liter over the course of a ballgame.
If you're drinking it in place of water, then 8 8-oz glasses wouldn't seem that far-fetched.
"Get it?" "Got it." "Good."
The Flagon with the Dragon
As a fellow physician, I would encourage you to disclaim this statement as your opinion, as there is not really any actual evidence to support it (there are plenty of industry-sponsored studies demonstrating the "safety" of artificial sweeteners, but nobody has been able to prove there is any health benefit to using them versus sugar). The ADA/AHA position paper on the matter (Circulation. 2012; 126: 509-519) from 2012 reports the following in its conclusion:
"At this time, there are insufficient data to determine conclusively whether the use of [non-nutritive sweeteners] to displace caloric sweeteners in beverages and foods reduces added sugars or carbohydrate intakes, or benefits appetite, energy balance, body weight, or cardiometabolic risk factors."
My own opinion is that regular consumption of Coke/Pepsi diet or otherwise is not good for anyone's health (there are cohort studies linking increased consumption of either/both to increased mortality risk -- contrast this to modest use of coffee or alcohol which decrease mortality risk). Beyond that I have no idea, other than there are some small studies suggesting that artificially sweetened beverages may actually increase mortality risk compared to sugar sweetened beverages (eg. PMID- 17275898)
Also, there has been a considerable 10 year decline in the consumption of sweetened soft drinks in general, both regular and diet. However, there has been no corresponding decline in sugar intake so, yes, it does seem that people will get their sugar one way or another.
This remains the salient post, however.
Meth is still good for me, right?
* This terminology confusion owing to my Northeastern roots, Midwestern adulthood.
Edit: AHA!
OK, I read that and have absolutely no idea what it is saying.
Nor a corresponding decline in obesity for that matter.
The evidence is never going to be great either way because of the fact that there won't be funding to get a clear answer.
I will need to look into it better.
Me too, which is unfortunate, because stevia tastes just like aspartame.
The fact that there are still practicing GPs telling their patients that drinking diet pop is just fine is pretty hard to comprehend. I hope you're not telling them to load up on margarine instead of butter too.
Science moves slowly into the mainstream, and doctors are certainly no exception. The post in this thread about "calories in calories out" is symptomatic of that attitude. Of course it's true that diet soda doesn't contribute to calories in but there is increasing research that shows it affects the body's metabolism in other detrimental ways.
And yea, the stuff is just gross, I don't know why anyone would drink it.
I'm going to do some research though to look into it better.
Never had any issues with sweet cravings or losing weight while on Diet Coke, though. The only real change I've found since I've been off is sleeping better without all that caffeine coursing through the veins. Used to be I'd sleep maybe 5-6 hours and rely on caffeine to push me through the day. Now I'm getting about an hour or so extra sleep.
My doctor was very, very happy when I told her I quit.
It's hard for me to imagine drinking 6 or 12 cans of anything during the day - I would probably be running back and forth to the men's room all day.
Except "calories in, calories out" is generally correct. It's an oversimplification that does not take every factor into account, but it's a reliable and useful rule of thumb. That said, diet soda IS gross and should be avoided by pretty much everyone.
This is when I first learned that butter was better than margarine.
Yes, but how do you determine calories out?
People measure?!? I suppose it's possible I've been skipping a step all these years...
And if you can do it mid stream, its more impressive
Calories in calories out is the only thing that matters in weight loss, nobody can dispute that (except the crazy HAES) people, but how the body responds to cravings, feelings of fullness and hunger, etc is certainly responsible for a lot of calories in, especially in obese people. I'm chronically 20lbs or so overweight and mostly it's because I drink way too much beer. On nights I don't drink beer, I eat a shitload of carbs. One time I did atkins and damn after a month my late night carb cravings were completely gone. That's the sort of longer term dieting that works and in general modifying the types of calories in helps with cravings, which in turn helps with weight.
I think that would only work for Hulk Hogan and Barry Bonds.
Not sure if this is a serious question, but I guess you can track calories in and find a level at which your weight remains constant. In any case, determining calories out seems less important than knowing how to increase them. Obviously, more physical activity and exercise. Converting fat into muscle will increase the number of calories you burn while at rest. There are other things you can do on the margin, but outside of smoking or taking hard drugs those are your best options.
I just don't think enough research has been done in this area.
Very few people are capable of being 100% good to themselves. Like BCC said in 89, at some point you just pick your vices and deal with the problems they cause.
Diet Coke has become it's own thing, there are variants that taste more like regular Coke, Coke Zero and Diet Coke w/Splenda, but they are less popular than normal Diet Coke because Diet Coke already has such a huge established following. Changing Diet Coke's flavor rather that creating variations like they have would have been New Coke all over again.
I like this, good comparison. There are some real nuts out there though that cannot be convinced they will lose weight if they burn more calories than they consume. It's a whole corner of the Internet I made the mistake of stumbling upon.
Yeah, that's very true. It's why losing weight is conceptually really easy (fewer calories in, more calories out!) but much, much harder in practice (I just ran 5 miles and I'm starving! Hello there giant bowl of pasta and box of cookies!).
Weight training is my preference since it has the most potential to improve your metabolism, but again, burning calories is burning calories in a general sense. The bigger issue is finding a form of exercise that you enjoy, or at least don't hate and that doesn't leave you ravenous with hunger. In terms of what to eat, that's more a health/nutrition issue than a pure weight lose issue. You could lose weight eating nothing but Snickers bars if you were capable of managing your caloric intake/output. Of course, that's a pretty huge "if".
I probably take things to an extreme, but my exercise regime consists of weight training with a pretty wide variety of cardio mixed in -- running, cycling, swimming, jumping rope, etc. Whatever I feel like that day and depending on what I'm training for. I think the variety helps me avoid injury and keeps things interesting, although running is the easiest and most flexible activity in terms of time/weather/equipment needed. But yes, the most important thing is to find something that you enjoy and that is relatively convenient so that you will do it often. And the more you do it the better you'll get at it and the more you will enjoy it.
I also don't see anything wrong with running 5 miles and then eating a big bowl of pasta. It's a lot better than doing neither. No, you won't lose weight as quickly but if you do it enough you will increase your metabolism. More importantly, you'll feel better and be healthier, which is a better goal than losing weight anyway. I'm not going to win any races or be on the cover of any magazines, but it's still an incredible feeling to have confidence in your body, what it can accomplish and where it can take you.
I don't know if you are just thinking out loud or asking for advice but if it's the latter I'll give a personal endorsement of Weight Watchers. I've lost 65 pounds and it's been incredibly easy. The biggest thing has been a retraining of how I eat.
A big thing is just eat more slowly and focus on enjoying each bite. Sounds ridiculous but it certainly helps with the "full feeling".
It's an amazing time to be a middle class American as you literally have access (well at least in most mid to large cities) to hundreds of different types of food at any given time and variety of food is another factor in weight loss. Everyone "gets sick of" stuff, even fatty delicious stuff like fried chicken and burgers. But if you can then go get a pizza... If you want to lose weight, don't ever move to an outer borough!
Mostly just thinking out loud. I've really tried to avoid sugar, bread, and pasta over the last few years (with occasional splurges), and I think it's helped.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main