Datasets:

chaoweihuang

/

SHP_pairwise

like 0

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Just so we're clear: Allergy to gluten is a thing, but is different from celiac disease. Both are well-defined and different from gluten intolerance, which is less clear. The most common explanation for increased allergies is the hygiene hypothesis. The idea is that aggressive modern hygiene removes the parasites and bacteria that help calibrate the immune system, leaving it more likely to react to harmless targets. It's also been suggested that modern wheat could be more allergenic. The cross-breeding of new wheat strains in the 1960s, which allowed us to feed billions of people, could have selected for a protein variant that immune systems just don't like. Modern wheat processing has also been noted as a potential contributor.\n\nB: We don't know. There are a number of theories about this. To clarify, while the increase may be exaggerated by people who falsely claim intolerance when they probably have other health issues (or are hypochondriacs), there is actually an increase in people with diagnosable gluten intolerance. And gluten intolerance is different than celiac. I'm taking here about gluten intolerance. Some possible causes include changes in the gut microbiome and changes in how we process and make bread. Changes in the gut microbiome are a likely cause/contributor but the causes and effects of that are just stating to be understood, and barely. So I won't go into that too much, but if anyone has questions I may be able to answer. On the processing side, one interesting theory is that the germ of wheat helps us process the gluten in some way. It has lots of nutrients, vitamins, fats, etc. Modern wheat flour (even most whole grain stuff) is made by separating the germ from the rest of the wheat first, then processing. This causes the flour to keep longer but removes all those nutrients. This is why flour/cereals need to be fortified. However, we only fortify with the vitamins and minerals for which we notice obvious deficiencies. So it's entirely feasible that we are neglecting to add something back into the flour that helps SOME people not develop gluten intolerance. This may be via some immune response or due to changes caused in the gut microbe (e.g. we are no longer giving some micronutrients to a specific bacteria in our gut so it dies out. That bacteria helped us process gluten or a byproduct and without its help we get sick). It's also possible that our body just needs some nutrient in the germ to process gluten efficiently. We really just don't know. Tldr: shits complicated literally edit: First, I know the difference between a theory and hypothesis. I was using the term colloquially, which *even scientists* do sometimes. People seem to have extrapolated way more than they should have from my comment. Like are asking me where to buy bread with wheat germ and how to fix their gut microbes. That's really not how this works. Anybody who gives you an easy answer to your problems is probably trying to sell you something (I'm looking at you, supplement/probiotics industry...). Until relatively recently we didn't even know bacteria could survive in your gut, so expecting the scientific community to have a solid understanding of the gut microbiome now is absurd. These questions span the fields of nutrition, microbial ecology, microbe-host interactions, immunology, and more. I'm sure there are hundreds of plausible explanations, but we are VERY FAR AWAY from definitively answering most questions related to the gut microbe. We DO know that it affects digestive health, mood, weight, and all kinds of other human physiology. What we don't know is how to bend it to our will or how it causes all of these things. We do know that the answer is complicated. How do different bacteria interact with each other in your gut, and then with your body? We also don't know much about that. But we're learning. There is a unique soup of maybe 1000 species of bacteria in your gut, and they are mostly different than the species that live in mine. We are just starting to learn how specific individual species of bacteria can affect their hosts. But even with this research, we don't think that it will be the same in everyone. example: Maybe bacteria A has effect B on me, but it has effect C on you, because I have bacteria Q in my gut and you don't, and bacteria Q is necessary for effect B. Now consider that x 1000 species, and that a genetic component also affects this, and diet and stress levels and fitness also affect this. See where I'm going? We do know that the gut microbe is influenced by stress, diet, sleep, environmental exposure, your parents, exercise, infection, travel, antibiotics, alcohol consumption, genetics, epigenetics (which is affected by all of these things and more), social habits, sun exposure, etc. Just to name a few. The extent to which these affect each person is probably highly variable. So asking about specific solutions or a quick fix is a waste of time, especially on the internet. And if you have a shitty diet - especially one high in carbs and sugar - or high stress levels, or you drink a lot, addressing those first is probably a smarter solution than asking about wheat germ and special bread and probiotics (may work in some cases for some people sometimes, and usually not as a \"fix\" but as a supplement. it's just not well studied enough.) and GMOs (no evidence of them affecting any of this or even a feasible mechanism for how they would). tldr2: no really, shit's complicated. Something that works for one person may not for another for hundreds of reasons that we don't know much about yet, but are sort-of on the verge of understanding. This is also why the human microbiome is so hard to study. Remember, none of this is well researched enough for there to be standardized advice for anybody outside of the normal \"live a healthy lifestyle\" advice, and slowly figuring out what makes you feel better. So don't ask for a quick fix and don't trust anyone who offers one. Here are some links about the microbiome and a couple on the microbiome and gluten. http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/microbiome/changing/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_microbiota https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161003113009.htm https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-guts-microbiome-changes-diet/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605783 https://genomemedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13073-016-0295-y http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/309642.php edit2: yes, non celiac wheat/gluten intolerance exists. some studies have shown that people who claim to have it do not, but that does not encompass all the literature. the key to those studies is that they were looking at SELF REPORTED gluten intolerance, so basically your average \"but gluten\" person, not people who were medically evaluated and thought to have it. turns out you just have to find the right people to study (who actually have it). just skim this google scholar search and you will see significant evidence of its existence: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=non+celiac\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Gluten intolerance remains fairly rare, and often not particularly severe. We have higher expectations for our own health now that we ever had in the past, so historically, people with a sensitivity to gluten may have just ignored it. Further, while many people relied on wheat-based food products, it wasn't the only diet out there, and only became as dominant as it is now in the 20th century.\n\nB: We don't know. There are a number of theories about this. To clarify, while the increase may be exaggerated by people who falsely claim intolerance when they probably have other health issues (or are hypochondriacs), there is actually an increase in people with diagnosable gluten intolerance. And gluten intolerance is different than celiac. I'm taking here about gluten intolerance. Some possible causes include changes in the gut microbiome and changes in how we process and make bread. Changes in the gut microbiome are a likely cause/contributor but the causes and effects of that are just stating to be understood, and barely. So I won't go into that too much, but if anyone has questions I may be able to answer. On the processing side, one interesting theory is that the germ of wheat helps us process the gluten in some way. It has lots of nutrients, vitamins, fats, etc. Modern wheat flour (even most whole grain stuff) is made by separating the germ from the rest of the wheat first, then processing. This causes the flour to keep longer but removes all those nutrients. This is why flour/cereals need to be fortified. However, we only fortify with the vitamins and minerals for which we notice obvious deficiencies. So it's entirely feasible that we are neglecting to add something back into the flour that helps SOME people not develop gluten intolerance. This may be via some immune response or due to changes caused in the gut microbe (e.g. we are no longer giving some micronutrients to a specific bacteria in our gut so it dies out. That bacteria helped us process gluten or a byproduct and without its help we get sick). It's also possible that our body just needs some nutrient in the germ to process gluten efficiently. We really just don't know. Tldr: shits complicated literally edit: First, I know the difference between a theory and hypothesis. I was using the term colloquially, which *even scientists* do sometimes. People seem to have extrapolated way more than they should have from my comment. Like are asking me where to buy bread with wheat germ and how to fix their gut microbes. That's really not how this works. Anybody who gives you an easy answer to your problems is probably trying to sell you something (I'm looking at you, supplement/probiotics industry...). Until relatively recently we didn't even know bacteria could survive in your gut, so expecting the scientific community to have a solid understanding of the gut microbiome now is absurd. These questions span the fields of nutrition, microbial ecology, microbe-host interactions, immunology, and more. I'm sure there are hundreds of plausible explanations, but we are VERY FAR AWAY from definitively answering most questions related to the gut microbe. We DO know that it affects digestive health, mood, weight, and all kinds of other human physiology. What we don't know is how to bend it to our will or how it causes all of these things. We do know that the answer is complicated. How do different bacteria interact with each other in your gut, and then with your body? We also don't know much about that. But we're learning. There is a unique soup of maybe 1000 species of bacteria in your gut, and they are mostly different than the species that live in mine. We are just starting to learn how specific individual species of bacteria can affect their hosts. But even with this research, we don't think that it will be the same in everyone. example: Maybe bacteria A has effect B on me, but it has effect C on you, because I have bacteria Q in my gut and you don't, and bacteria Q is necessary for effect B. Now consider that x 1000 species, and that a genetic component also affects this, and diet and stress levels and fitness also affect this. See where I'm going? We do know that the gut microbe is influenced by stress, diet, sleep, environmental exposure, your parents, exercise, infection, travel, antibiotics, alcohol consumption, genetics, epigenetics (which is affected by all of these things and more), social habits, sun exposure, etc. Just to name a few. The extent to which these affect each person is probably highly variable. So asking about specific solutions or a quick fix is a waste of time, especially on the internet. And if you have a shitty diet - especially one high in carbs and sugar - or high stress levels, or you drink a lot, addressing those first is probably a smarter solution than asking about wheat germ and special bread and probiotics (may work in some cases for some people sometimes, and usually not as a \"fix\" but as a supplement. it's just not well studied enough.) and GMOs (no evidence of them affecting any of this or even a feasible mechanism for how they would). tldr2: no really, shit's complicated. Something that works for one person may not for another for hundreds of reasons that we don't know much about yet, but are sort-of on the verge of understanding. This is also why the human microbiome is so hard to study. Remember, none of this is well researched enough for there to be standardized advice for anybody outside of the normal \"live a healthy lifestyle\" advice, and slowly figuring out what makes you feel better. So don't ask for a quick fix and don't trust anyone who offers one. Here are some links about the microbiome and a couple on the microbiome and gluten. http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/microbiome/changing/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_microbiota https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161003113009.htm https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-guts-microbiome-changes-diet/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605783 https://genomemedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13073-016-0295-y http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/309642.php edit2: yes, non celiac wheat/gluten intolerance exists. some studies have shown that people who claim to have it do not, but that does not encompass all the literature. the key to those studies is that they were looking at SELF REPORTED gluten intolerance, so basically your average \"but gluten\" person, not people who were medically evaluated and thought to have it. turns out you just have to find the right people to study (who actually have it). just skim this google scholar search and you will see significant evidence of its existence: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=non+celiac\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Probably the same reason people are lactose intolerant. Unless milk could actually out right kill them, they stay in the gene pool. I've been drinking milk since I was a kid. Had bad cramps every day. But since every kid eats cereal for breakfast, milk being the culprit never dawned on me. Suddenly lactose-free milk comes out, I suddenly find that moo juice was the cause. I'm sure generations have suffered the same fate before me.\n\nB: We don't know. There are a number of theories about this. To clarify, while the increase may be exaggerated by people who falsely claim intolerance when they probably have other health issues (or are hypochondriacs), there is actually an increase in people with diagnosable gluten intolerance. And gluten intolerance is different than celiac. I'm taking here about gluten intolerance. Some possible causes include changes in the gut microbiome and changes in how we process and make bread. Changes in the gut microbiome are a likely cause/contributor but the causes and effects of that are just stating to be understood, and barely. So I won't go into that too much, but if anyone has questions I may be able to answer. On the processing side, one interesting theory is that the germ of wheat helps us process the gluten in some way. It has lots of nutrients, vitamins, fats, etc. Modern wheat flour (even most whole grain stuff) is made by separating the germ from the rest of the wheat first, then processing. This causes the flour to keep longer but removes all those nutrients. This is why flour/cereals need to be fortified. However, we only fortify with the vitamins and minerals for which we notice obvious deficiencies. So it's entirely feasible that we are neglecting to add something back into the flour that helps SOME people not develop gluten intolerance. This may be via some immune response or due to changes caused in the gut microbe (e.g. we are no longer giving some micronutrients to a specific bacteria in our gut so it dies out. That bacteria helped us process gluten or a byproduct and without its help we get sick). It's also possible that our body just needs some nutrient in the germ to process gluten efficiently. We really just don't know. Tldr: shits complicated literally edit: First, I know the difference between a theory and hypothesis. I was using the term colloquially, which *even scientists* do sometimes. People seem to have extrapolated way more than they should have from my comment. Like are asking me where to buy bread with wheat germ and how to fix their gut microbes. That's really not how this works. Anybody who gives you an easy answer to your problems is probably trying to sell you something (I'm looking at you, supplement/probiotics industry...). Until relatively recently we didn't even know bacteria could survive in your gut, so expecting the scientific community to have a solid understanding of the gut microbiome now is absurd. These questions span the fields of nutrition, microbial ecology, microbe-host interactions, immunology, and more. I'm sure there are hundreds of plausible explanations, but we are VERY FAR AWAY from definitively answering most questions related to the gut microbe. We DO know that it affects digestive health, mood, weight, and all kinds of other human physiology. What we don't know is how to bend it to our will or how it causes all of these things. We do know that the answer is complicated. How do different bacteria interact with each other in your gut, and then with your body? We also don't know much about that. But we're learning. There is a unique soup of maybe 1000 species of bacteria in your gut, and they are mostly different than the species that live in mine. We are just starting to learn how specific individual species of bacteria can affect their hosts. But even with this research, we don't think that it will be the same in everyone. example: Maybe bacteria A has effect B on me, but it has effect C on you, because I have bacteria Q in my gut and you don't, and bacteria Q is necessary for effect B. Now consider that x 1000 species, and that a genetic component also affects this, and diet and stress levels and fitness also affect this. See where I'm going? We do know that the gut microbe is influenced by stress, diet, sleep, environmental exposure, your parents, exercise, infection, travel, antibiotics, alcohol consumption, genetics, epigenetics (which is affected by all of these things and more), social habits, sun exposure, etc. Just to name a few. The extent to which these affect each person is probably highly variable. So asking about specific solutions or a quick fix is a waste of time, especially on the internet. And if you have a shitty diet - especially one high in carbs and sugar - or high stress levels, or you drink a lot, addressing those first is probably a smarter solution than asking about wheat germ and special bread and probiotics (may work in some cases for some people sometimes, and usually not as a \"fix\" but as a supplement. it's just not well studied enough.) and GMOs (no evidence of them affecting any of this or even a feasible mechanism for how they would). tldr2: no really, shit's complicated. Something that works for one person may not for another for hundreds of reasons that we don't know much about yet, but are sort-of on the verge of understanding. This is also why the human microbiome is so hard to study. Remember, none of this is well researched enough for there to be standardized advice for anybody outside of the normal \"live a healthy lifestyle\" advice, and slowly figuring out what makes you feel better. So don't ask for a quick fix and don't trust anyone who offers one. Here are some links about the microbiome and a couple on the microbiome and gluten. http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/microbiome/changing/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_microbiota https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161003113009.htm https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-guts-microbiome-changes-diet/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605783 https://genomemedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13073-016-0295-y http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/309642.php edit2: yes, non celiac wheat/gluten intolerance exists. some studies have shown that people who claim to have it do not, but that does not encompass all the literature. the key to those studies is that they were looking at SELF REPORTED gluten intolerance, so basically your average \"but gluten\" person, not people who were medically evaluated and thought to have it. turns out you just have to find the right people to study (who actually have it). just skim this google scholar search and you will see significant evidence of its existence: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=non+celiac\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: We don't know. There are a number of theories about this. To clarify, while the increase may be exaggerated by people who falsely claim intolerance when they probably have other health issues (or are hypochondriacs), there is actually an increase in people with diagnosable gluten intolerance. And gluten intolerance is different than celiac. I'm taking here about gluten intolerance. Some possible causes include changes in the gut microbiome and changes in how we process and make bread. Changes in the gut microbiome are a likely cause/contributor but the causes and effects of that are just stating to be understood, and barely. So I won't go into that too much, but if anyone has questions I may be able to answer. On the processing side, one interesting theory is that the germ of wheat helps us process the gluten in some way. It has lots of nutrients, vitamins, fats, etc. Modern wheat flour (even most whole grain stuff) is made by separating the germ from the rest of the wheat first, then processing. This causes the flour to keep longer but removes all those nutrients. This is why flour/cereals need to be fortified. However, we only fortify with the vitamins and minerals for which we notice obvious deficiencies. So it's entirely feasible that we are neglecting to add something back into the flour that helps SOME people not develop gluten intolerance. This may be via some immune response or due to changes caused in the gut microbe (e.g. we are no longer giving some micronutrients to a specific bacteria in our gut so it dies out. That bacteria helped us process gluten or a byproduct and without its help we get sick). It's also possible that our body just needs some nutrient in the germ to process gluten efficiently. We really just don't know. Tldr: shits complicated literally edit: First, I know the difference between a theory and hypothesis. I was using the term colloquially, which *even scientists* do sometimes. People seem to have extrapolated way more than they should have from my comment. Like are asking me where to buy bread with wheat germ and how to fix their gut microbes. That's really not how this works. Anybody who gives you an easy answer to your problems is probably trying to sell you something (I'm looking at you, supplement/probiotics industry...). Until relatively recently we didn't even know bacteria could survive in your gut, so expecting the scientific community to have a solid understanding of the gut microbiome now is absurd. These questions span the fields of nutrition, microbial ecology, microbe-host interactions, immunology, and more. I'm sure there are hundreds of plausible explanations, but we are VERY FAR AWAY from definitively answering most questions related to the gut microbe. We DO know that it affects digestive health, mood, weight, and all kinds of other human physiology. What we don't know is how to bend it to our will or how it causes all of these things. We do know that the answer is complicated. How do different bacteria interact with each other in your gut, and then with your body? We also don't know much about that. But we're learning. There is a unique soup of maybe 1000 species of bacteria in your gut, and they are mostly different than the species that live in mine. We are just starting to learn how specific individual species of bacteria can affect their hosts. But even with this research, we don't think that it will be the same in everyone. example: Maybe bacteria A has effect B on me, but it has effect C on you, because I have bacteria Q in my gut and you don't, and bacteria Q is necessary for effect B. Now consider that x 1000 species, and that a genetic component also affects this, and diet and stress levels and fitness also affect this. See where I'm going? We do know that the gut microbe is influenced by stress, diet, sleep, environmental exposure, your parents, exercise, infection, travel, antibiotics, alcohol consumption, genetics, epigenetics (which is affected by all of these things and more), social habits, sun exposure, etc. Just to name a few. The extent to which these affect each person is probably highly variable. So asking about specific solutions or a quick fix is a waste of time, especially on the internet. And if you have a shitty diet - especially one high in carbs and sugar - or high stress levels, or you drink a lot, addressing those first is probably a smarter solution than asking about wheat germ and special bread and probiotics (may work in some cases for some people sometimes, and usually not as a \"fix\" but as a supplement. it's just not well studied enough.) and GMOs (no evidence of them affecting any of this or even a feasible mechanism for how they would). tldr2: no really, shit's complicated. Something that works for one person may not for another for hundreds of reasons that we don't know much about yet, but are sort-of on the verge of understanding. This is also why the human microbiome is so hard to study. Remember, none of this is well researched enough for there to be standardized advice for anybody outside of the normal \"live a healthy lifestyle\" advice, and slowly figuring out what makes you feel better. So don't ask for a quick fix and don't trust anyone who offers one. Here are some links about the microbiome and a couple on the microbiome and gluten. http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/microbiome/changing/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_microbiota https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161003113009.htm https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-guts-microbiome-changes-diet/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605783 https://genomemedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13073-016-0295-y http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/309642.php edit2: yes, non celiac wheat/gluten intolerance exists. some studies have shown that people who claim to have it do not, but that does not encompass all the literature. the key to those studies is that they were looking at SELF REPORTED gluten intolerance, so basically your average \"but gluten\" person, not people who were medically evaluated and thought to have it. turns out you just have to find the right people to study (who actually have it). just skim this google scholar search and you will see significant evidence of its existence: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=non+celiac\n\nB: Reddit has a weird hate boner about gluten, so a lot of folks are going to tell you the rise in allergies is psychosomatic. That's not true: > For reasons that remain largely unexplained, the incidence of celiac disease has increased more than fourfold in the past sixty years. Researchers initially attributed the growing number of cases to greater public awareness and better diagnoses. But neither can fully account for the leap since 1950. Murray and his colleagues at the Mayo Clinic discovered the increase almost by accident. Murray wanted to examine the long-term effects of undiagnosed celiac disease. To do that, he analyzed blood samples that had been taken from nine thousand Air Force recruits between 1948 and 1954. The researchers looked for antibodies to an enzyme called transglutaminase; they are a reliable marker for celiac disease. **Murray assumed that one per cent of the soldiers would test positive, matching the current celiac rate. Instead, the team found the antibodies in the blood of just two-tenths of one per cent of the soldiers.** Then they compared the results with samples taken recently from demographically similar groups of twenty- and seventy-year-old men. In both groups, the biochemical markers were present in about one per cent of the samples. The whole article is interesting, and it's well reported (it's from the New Yorker, not some sketchy clickbait \"GlutenAlert365.com\" meme your aunt posts on Facebook).\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: The wheat of today and the wheat of our ancestors is vastly different in terms of constitution, cultivation and processing. It has been hybridized for greater yield, bathed in pesticides and then largely stripped of its remaining nutrition to produce the ubiquitous wheat flour that is in a huge percentage of our foods today. Our bodies have had essentially 1-2 generations to adapt to this largely new food product that has more differences than similarities to the ancient grain and subsequent processing our ancestor's bodies were accustomed to. Also, ITT people are conflating true wheat (gluten) allergy with wheat (gluten) sensitivity. These are matters of degree and have significant differences. edit: sp\n\nB: We don't know. There are a number of theories about this. To clarify, while the increase may be exaggerated by people who falsely claim intolerance when they probably have other health issues (or are hypochondriacs), there is actually an increase in people with diagnosable gluten intolerance. And gluten intolerance is different than celiac. I'm taking here about gluten intolerance. Some possible causes include changes in the gut microbiome and changes in how we process and make bread. Changes in the gut microbiome are a likely cause/contributor but the causes and effects of that are just stating to be understood, and barely. So I won't go into that too much, but if anyone has questions I may be able to answer. On the processing side, one interesting theory is that the germ of wheat helps us process the gluten in some way. It has lots of nutrients, vitamins, fats, etc. Modern wheat flour (even most whole grain stuff) is made by separating the germ from the rest of the wheat first, then processing. This causes the flour to keep longer but removes all those nutrients. This is why flour/cereals need to be fortified. However, we only fortify with the vitamins and minerals for which we notice obvious deficiencies. So it's entirely feasible that we are neglecting to add something back into the flour that helps SOME people not develop gluten intolerance. This may be via some immune response or due to changes caused in the gut microbe (e.g. we are no longer giving some micronutrients to a specific bacteria in our gut so it dies out. That bacteria helped us process gluten or a byproduct and without its help we get sick). It's also possible that our body just needs some nutrient in the germ to process gluten efficiently. We really just don't know. Tldr: shits complicated literally edit: First, I know the difference between a theory and hypothesis. I was using the term colloquially, which *even scientists* do sometimes. People seem to have extrapolated way more than they should have from my comment. Like are asking me where to buy bread with wheat germ and how to fix their gut microbes. That's really not how this works. Anybody who gives you an easy answer to your problems is probably trying to sell you something (I'm looking at you, supplement/probiotics industry...). Until relatively recently we didn't even know bacteria could survive in your gut, so expecting the scientific community to have a solid understanding of the gut microbiome now is absurd. These questions span the fields of nutrition, microbial ecology, microbe-host interactions, immunology, and more. I'm sure there are hundreds of plausible explanations, but we are VERY FAR AWAY from definitively answering most questions related to the gut microbe. We DO know that it affects digestive health, mood, weight, and all kinds of other human physiology. What we don't know is how to bend it to our will or how it causes all of these things. We do know that the answer is complicated. How do different bacteria interact with each other in your gut, and then with your body? We also don't know much about that. But we're learning. There is a unique soup of maybe 1000 species of bacteria in your gut, and they are mostly different than the species that live in mine. We are just starting to learn how specific individual species of bacteria can affect their hosts. But even with this research, we don't think that it will be the same in everyone. example: Maybe bacteria A has effect B on me, but it has effect C on you, because I have bacteria Q in my gut and you don't, and bacteria Q is necessary for effect B. Now consider that x 1000 species, and that a genetic component also affects this, and diet and stress levels and fitness also affect this. See where I'm going? We do know that the gut microbe is influenced by stress, diet, sleep, environmental exposure, your parents, exercise, infection, travel, antibiotics, alcohol consumption, genetics, epigenetics (which is affected by all of these things and more), social habits, sun exposure, etc. Just to name a few. The extent to which these affect each person is probably highly variable. So asking about specific solutions or a quick fix is a waste of time, especially on the internet. And if you have a shitty diet - especially one high in carbs and sugar - or high stress levels, or you drink a lot, addressing those first is probably a smarter solution than asking about wheat germ and special bread and probiotics (may work in some cases for some people sometimes, and usually not as a \"fix\" but as a supplement. it's just not well studied enough.) and GMOs (no evidence of them affecting any of this or even a feasible mechanism for how they would). tldr2: no really, shit's complicated. Something that works for one person may not for another for hundreds of reasons that we don't know much about yet, but are sort-of on the verge of understanding. This is also why the human microbiome is so hard to study. Remember, none of this is well researched enough for there to be standardized advice for anybody outside of the normal \"live a healthy lifestyle\" advice, and slowly figuring out what makes you feel better. So don't ask for a quick fix and don't trust anyone who offers one. Here are some links about the microbiome and a couple on the microbiome and gluten. http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/microbiome/changing/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_microbiota https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/10/161003113009.htm https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-guts-microbiome-changes-diet/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26605783 https://genomemedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13073-016-0295-y http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/309642.php edit2: yes, non celiac wheat/gluten intolerance exists. some studies have shown that people who claim to have it do not, but that does not encompass all the literature. the key to those studies is that they were looking at SELF REPORTED gluten intolerance, so basically your average \"but gluten\" person, not people who were medically evaluated and thought to have it. turns out you just have to find the right people to study (who actually have it). just skim this google scholar search and you will see significant evidence of its existence: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=non+celiac\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Gluten intolerance remains fairly rare, and often not particularly severe. We have higher expectations for our own health now that we ever had in the past, so historically, people with a sensitivity to gluten may have just ignored it. Further, while many people relied on wheat-based food products, it wasn't the only diet out there, and only became as dominant as it is now in the 20th century.\n\nB: Just so we're clear: Allergy to gluten is a thing, but is different from celiac disease. Both are well-defined and different from gluten intolerance, which is less clear. The most common explanation for increased allergies is the hygiene hypothesis. The idea is that aggressive modern hygiene removes the parasites and bacteria that help calibrate the immune system, leaving it more likely to react to harmless targets. It's also been suggested that modern wheat could be more allergenic. The cross-breeding of new wheat strains in the 1960s, which allowed us to feed billions of people, could have selected for a protein variant that immune systems just don't like. Modern wheat processing has also been noted as a potential contributor.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: There's a great Netflix 4-part documentary called Cooked that delves into this. The documentary series 4 parts were titled Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and it looked at an anthropological history of our diets and hunting/eating/cooking rituals. The Air episode was all about bread, and about how it has been a staple of our diets for so long. Their postulate was that for the vast majority of people, gluten isn't the issue. Sure there are some people for whom the gluten is the problem, they just assume it is because modern bread doesn't agree with them because of the accelerated processes they use to make it. Or perhaps there used to be something in bread that prevented gluten from having such an adverse reaction. It used to be that bread was fermented. The dough was a living, breathing colony. In more recent years, to speed up the bread making process, instead of allowing the natural bacteria in the water supply to thrive in the wheat and change it - they instead use \"clean\" additives, such as yeast. Due to this, there are various nutrients that used to be in bread that aren't any more, so manufacturers have also added fortifications in also, to make up for those that were missing and actually have it be nutritious. TLDR: The bread we eat now isn't really anything like the bread our bodies evolved with.\n\nB: Gluten intolerance remains fairly rare, and often not particularly severe. We have higher expectations for our own health now that we ever had in the past, so historically, people with a sensitivity to gluten may have just ignored it. Further, while many people relied on wheat-based food products, it wasn't the only diet out there, and only became as dominant as it is now in the 20th century.\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: There's a great Netflix 4-part documentary called Cooked that delves into this. The documentary series 4 parts were titled Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and it looked at an anthropological history of our diets and hunting/eating/cooking rituals. The Air episode was all about bread, and about how it has been a staple of our diets for so long. Their postulate was that for the vast majority of people, gluten isn't the issue. Sure there are some people for whom the gluten is the problem, they just assume it is because modern bread doesn't agree with them because of the accelerated processes they use to make it. Or perhaps there used to be something in bread that prevented gluten from having such an adverse reaction. It used to be that bread was fermented. The dough was a living, breathing colony. In more recent years, to speed up the bread making process, instead of allowing the natural bacteria in the water supply to thrive in the wheat and change it - they instead use \"clean\" additives, such as yeast. Due to this, there are various nutrients that used to be in bread that aren't any more, so manufacturers have also added fortifications in also, to make up for those that were missing and actually have it be nutritious. TLDR: The bread we eat now isn't really anything like the bread our bodies evolved with.\n\nB: A documentary was made for this exact question. It's called Cooked: Air. From what I remember, it basically said that the way we make bread has changed drastically in the past 200 years (wonder bread, pure white flour, instant yeast, etc.) and that is what has caused people's \"gluten allergies,\" not to be confused with Celiac's disease. It says that the original way to make bread, with homemade flour and long periods of fermentation, is better for people, and that most people aren't allergic to it.\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Probably the same reason people are lactose intolerant. Unless milk could actually out right kill them, they stay in the gene pool. I've been drinking milk since I was a kid. Had bad cramps every day. But since every kid eats cereal for breakfast, milk being the culprit never dawned on me. Suddenly lactose-free milk comes out, I suddenly find that moo juice was the cause. I'm sure generations have suffered the same fate before me.\n\nB: There's a great Netflix 4-part documentary called Cooked that delves into this. The documentary series 4 parts were titled Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and it looked at an anthropological history of our diets and hunting/eating/cooking rituals. The Air episode was all about bread, and about how it has been a staple of our diets for so long. Their postulate was that for the vast majority of people, gluten isn't the issue. Sure there are some people for whom the gluten is the problem, they just assume it is because modern bread doesn't agree with them because of the accelerated processes they use to make it. Or perhaps there used to be something in bread that prevented gluten from having such an adverse reaction. It used to be that bread was fermented. The dough was a living, breathing colony. In more recent years, to speed up the bread making process, instead of allowing the natural bacteria in the water supply to thrive in the wheat and change it - they instead use \"clean\" additives, such as yeast. Due to this, there are various nutrients that used to be in bread that aren't any more, so manufacturers have also added fortifications in also, to make up for those that were missing and actually have it be nutritious. TLDR: The bread we eat now isn't really anything like the bread our bodies evolved with.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Reddit has a weird hate boner about gluten, so a lot of folks are going to tell you the rise in allergies is psychosomatic. That's not true: > For reasons that remain largely unexplained, the incidence of celiac disease has increased more than fourfold in the past sixty years. Researchers initially attributed the growing number of cases to greater public awareness and better diagnoses. But neither can fully account for the leap since 1950. Murray and his colleagues at the Mayo Clinic discovered the increase almost by accident. Murray wanted to examine the long-term effects of undiagnosed celiac disease. To do that, he analyzed blood samples that had been taken from nine thousand Air Force recruits between 1948 and 1954. The researchers looked for antibodies to an enzyme called transglutaminase; they are a reliable marker for celiac disease. **Murray assumed that one per cent of the soldiers would test positive, matching the current celiac rate. Instead, the team found the antibodies in the blood of just two-tenths of one per cent of the soldiers.** Then they compared the results with samples taken recently from demographically similar groups of twenty- and seventy-year-old men. In both groups, the biochemical markers were present in about one per cent of the samples. The whole article is interesting, and it's well reported (it's from the New Yorker, not some sketchy clickbait \"GlutenAlert365.com\" meme your aunt posts on Facebook).\n\nB: There's a great Netflix 4-part documentary called Cooked that delves into this. The documentary series 4 parts were titled Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and it looked at an anthropological history of our diets and hunting/eating/cooking rituals. The Air episode was all about bread, and about how it has been a staple of our diets for so long. Their postulate was that for the vast majority of people, gluten isn't the issue. Sure there are some people for whom the gluten is the problem, they just assume it is because modern bread doesn't agree with them because of the accelerated processes they use to make it. Or perhaps there used to be something in bread that prevented gluten from having such an adverse reaction. It used to be that bread was fermented. The dough was a living, breathing colony. In more recent years, to speed up the bread making process, instead of allowing the natural bacteria in the water supply to thrive in the wheat and change it - they instead use \"clean\" additives, such as yeast. Due to this, there are various nutrients that used to be in bread that aren't any more, so manufacturers have also added fortifications in also, to make up for those that were missing and actually have it be nutritious. TLDR: The bread we eat now isn't really anything like the bread our bodies evolved with.\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: a little off topic : one thing I read a long time ago in nature before the anti-gluten trend we're seeing. It was an article about fibre in our modern western diets. and how we lack a lot of fibre in our diets and how the lack of fibre causes the lower intestines to not be healthy, getting swollen and enflamed. When the lower intestines get to this stage, gluten can and has been shown to pass through the walls into the blood stream. At that point, once past the barrier, problems occur. It was a good read and I'm sure I'm paraphrasing it way wrong, but what I took from it, because our diets are bad in one way it's causing other problems to appear. And you didn't have to have an allergy or Celiacs to see some of the problems appearing. note: I think this is very different then the trend we are seeing today where everybody is afraid of the \"glutens\" I'd love to find that old magazine or online version to re-read it and see how relevant it is.\n\nB: There's a great Netflix 4-part documentary called Cooked that delves into this. The documentary series 4 parts were titled Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and it looked at an anthropological history of our diets and hunting/eating/cooking rituals. The Air episode was all about bread, and about how it has been a staple of our diets for so long. Their postulate was that for the vast majority of people, gluten isn't the issue. Sure there are some people for whom the gluten is the problem, they just assume it is because modern bread doesn't agree with them because of the accelerated processes they use to make it. Or perhaps there used to be something in bread that prevented gluten from having such an adverse reaction. It used to be that bread was fermented. The dough was a living, breathing colony. In more recent years, to speed up the bread making process, instead of allowing the natural bacteria in the water supply to thrive in the wheat and change it - they instead use \"clean\" additives, such as yeast. Due to this, there are various nutrients that used to be in bread that aren't any more, so manufacturers have also added fortifications in also, to make up for those that were missing and actually have it be nutritious. TLDR: The bread we eat now isn't really anything like the bread our bodies evolved with.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: There's a great Netflix 4-part documentary called Cooked that delves into this. The documentary series 4 parts were titled Earth, Air, Fire & Water, and it looked at an anthropological history of our diets and hunting/eating/cooking rituals. The Air episode was all about bread, and about how it has been a staple of our diets for so long. Their postulate was that for the vast majority of people, gluten isn't the issue. Sure there are some people for whom the gluten is the problem, they just assume it is because modern bread doesn't agree with them because of the accelerated processes they use to make it. Or perhaps there used to be something in bread that prevented gluten from having such an adverse reaction. It used to be that bread was fermented. The dough was a living, breathing colony. In more recent years, to speed up the bread making process, instead of allowing the natural bacteria in the water supply to thrive in the wheat and change it - they instead use \"clean\" additives, such as yeast. Due to this, there are various nutrients that used to be in bread that aren't any more, so manufacturers have also added fortifications in also, to make up for those that were missing and actually have it be nutritious. TLDR: The bread we eat now isn't really anything like the bread our bodies evolved with.\n\nB: The wheat of today and the wheat of our ancestors is vastly different in terms of constitution, cultivation and processing. It has been hybridized for greater yield, bathed in pesticides and then largely stripped of its remaining nutrition to produce the ubiquitous wheat flour that is in a huge percentage of our foods today. Our bodies have had essentially 1-2 generations to adapt to this largely new food product that has more differences than similarities to the ancient grain and subsequent processing our ancestor's bodies were accustomed to. Also, ITT people are conflating true wheat (gluten) allergy with wheat (gluten) sensitivity. These are matters of degree and have significant differences. edit: sp\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: A documentary was made for this exact question. It's called Cooked: Air. From what I remember, it basically said that the way we make bread has changed drastically in the past 200 years (wonder bread, pure white flour, instant yeast, etc.) and that is what has caused people's \"gluten allergies,\" not to be confused with Celiac's disease. It says that the original way to make bread, with homemade flour and long periods of fermentation, is better for people, and that most people aren't allergic to it.\n\nB: Probably the same reason people are lactose intolerant. Unless milk could actually out right kill them, they stay in the gene pool. I've been drinking milk since I was a kid. Had bad cramps every day. But since every kid eats cereal for breakfast, milk being the culprit never dawned on me. Suddenly lactose-free milk comes out, I suddenly find that moo juice was the cause. I'm sure generations have suffered the same fate before me.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: A documentary was made for this exact question. It's called Cooked: Air. From what I remember, it basically said that the way we make bread has changed drastically in the past 200 years (wonder bread, pure white flour, instant yeast, etc.) and that is what has caused people's \"gluten allergies,\" not to be confused with Celiac's disease. It says that the original way to make bread, with homemade flour and long periods of fermentation, is better for people, and that most people aren't allergic to it.\n\nB: Reddit has a weird hate boner about gluten, so a lot of folks are going to tell you the rise in allergies is psychosomatic. That's not true: > For reasons that remain largely unexplained, the incidence of celiac disease has increased more than fourfold in the past sixty years. Researchers initially attributed the growing number of cases to greater public awareness and better diagnoses. But neither can fully account for the leap since 1950. Murray and his colleagues at the Mayo Clinic discovered the increase almost by accident. Murray wanted to examine the long-term effects of undiagnosed celiac disease. To do that, he analyzed blood samples that had been taken from nine thousand Air Force recruits between 1948 and 1954. The researchers looked for antibodies to an enzyme called transglutaminase; they are a reliable marker for celiac disease. **Murray assumed that one per cent of the soldiers would test positive, matching the current celiac rate. Instead, the team found the antibodies in the blood of just two-tenths of one per cent of the soldiers.** Then they compared the results with samples taken recently from demographically similar groups of twenty- and seventy-year-old men. In both groups, the biochemical markers were present in about one per cent of the samples. The whole article is interesting, and it's well reported (it's from the New Yorker, not some sketchy clickbait \"GlutenAlert365.com\" meme your aunt posts on Facebook).\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: a little off topic : one thing I read a long time ago in nature before the anti-gluten trend we're seeing. It was an article about fibre in our modern western diets. and how we lack a lot of fibre in our diets and how the lack of fibre causes the lower intestines to not be healthy, getting swollen and enflamed. When the lower intestines get to this stage, gluten can and has been shown to pass through the walls into the blood stream. At that point, once past the barrier, problems occur. It was a good read and I'm sure I'm paraphrasing it way wrong, but what I took from it, because our diets are bad in one way it's causing other problems to appear. And you didn't have to have an allergy or Celiacs to see some of the problems appearing. note: I think this is very different then the trend we are seeing today where everybody is afraid of the \"glutens\" I'd love to find that old magazine or online version to re-read it and see how relevant it is.\n\nB: A documentary was made for this exact question. It's called Cooked: Air. From what I remember, it basically said that the way we make bread has changed drastically in the past 200 years (wonder bread, pure white flour, instant yeast, etc.) and that is what has caused people's \"gluten allergies,\" not to be confused with Celiac's disease. It says that the original way to make bread, with homemade flour and long periods of fermentation, is better for people, and that most people aren't allergic to it.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: A documentary was made for this exact question. It's called Cooked: Air. From what I remember, it basically said that the way we make bread has changed drastically in the past 200 years (wonder bread, pure white flour, instant yeast, etc.) and that is what has caused people's \"gluten allergies,\" not to be confused with Celiac's disease. It says that the original way to make bread, with homemade flour and long periods of fermentation, is better for people, and that most people aren't allergic to it.\n\nB: The wheat of today and the wheat of our ancestors is vastly different in terms of constitution, cultivation and processing. It has been hybridized for greater yield, bathed in pesticides and then largely stripped of its remaining nutrition to produce the ubiquitous wheat flour that is in a huge percentage of our foods today. Our bodies have had essentially 1-2 generations to adapt to this largely new food product that has more differences than similarities to the ancient grain and subsequent processing our ancestor's bodies were accustomed to. Also, ITT people are conflating true wheat (gluten) allergy with wheat (gluten) sensitivity. These are matters of degree and have significant differences. edit: sp\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: Probably the same reason people are lactose intolerant. Unless milk could actually out right kill them, they stay in the gene pool. I've been drinking milk since I was a kid. Had bad cramps every day. But since every kid eats cereal for breakfast, milk being the culprit never dawned on me. Suddenly lactose-free milk comes out, I suddenly find that moo juice was the cause. I'm sure generations have suffered the same fate before me.\n\nB: Reddit has a weird hate boner about gluten, so a lot of folks are going to tell you the rise in allergies is psychosomatic. That's not true: > For reasons that remain largely unexplained, the incidence of celiac disease has increased more than fourfold in the past sixty years. Researchers initially attributed the growing number of cases to greater public awareness and better diagnoses. But neither can fully account for the leap since 1950. Murray and his colleagues at the Mayo Clinic discovered the increase almost by accident. Murray wanted to examine the long-term effects of undiagnosed celiac disease. To do that, he analyzed blood samples that had been taken from nine thousand Air Force recruits between 1948 and 1954. The researchers looked for antibodies to an enzyme called transglutaminase; they are a reliable marker for celiac disease. **Murray assumed that one per cent of the soldiers would test positive, matching the current celiac rate. Instead, the team found the antibodies in the blood of just two-tenths of one per cent of the soldiers.** Then they compared the results with samples taken recently from demographically similar groups of twenty- and seventy-year-old men. In both groups, the biochemical markers were present in about one per cent of the samples. The whole article is interesting, and it's well reported (it's from the New Yorker, not some sketchy clickbait \"GlutenAlert365.com\" meme your aunt posts on Facebook).\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old:How after 5000 years of humanity surviving off of bread do we have so many people within the last decade who are entirely allergic to gluten?\n\nA: The wheat of today and the wheat of our ancestors is vastly different in terms of constitution, cultivation and processing. It has been hybridized for greater yield, bathed in pesticides and then largely stripped of its remaining nutrition to produce the ubiquitous wheat flour that is in a huge percentage of our foods today. Our bodies have had essentially 1-2 generations to adapt to this largely new food product that has more differences than similarities to the ancient grain and subsequent processing our ancestor's bodies were accustomed to. Also, ITT people are conflating true wheat (gluten) allergy with wheat (gluten) sensitivity. These are matters of degree and have significant differences. edit: sp\n\nB: a little off topic : one thing I read a long time ago in nature before the anti-gluten trend we're seeing. It was an article about fibre in our modern western diets. and how we lack a lot of fibre in our diets and how the lack of fibre causes the lower intestines to not be healthy, getting swollen and enflamed. When the lower intestines get to this stage, gluten can and has been shown to pass through the walls into the blood stream. At that point, once past the barrier, problems occur. It was a good read and I'm sure I'm paraphrasing it way wrong, but what I took from it, because our diets are bad in one way it's causing other problems to appear. And you didn't have to have an allergy or Celiacs to see some of the problems appearing. note: I think this is very different then the trend we are seeing today where everybody is afraid of the \"glutens\" I'd love to find that old magazine or online version to re-read it and see how relevant it is.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: How did we get to the point where laptops and smartphones are in the same price range?\n\nA: The difference is that most people are buying the top spec smartphones ($1000+), but not nearly as many people buy top spec laptops ($2500+).\n\nB: Demand for fancier phones with bigger screens and better cameras = higher cost, more people willing to pay for them. That being said, this is only true if you're comparing very specific subsets of price ranges. Laptops are still notably more expensive. Unless you're say, comparing a middle of the road phone to a low end laptop which isn't really a fair comparison. Looking at only big namebrands here to remove extreme outliers. A low-end smartphone (Samsung Galaxy A10) might be $120. A low-end laptop (Asus Chromebook C523) might be $240. A top-end smartphone (iPhone XS Max) might be $1500. A top-end laptop might be anywhere from $2500 for a more general purpose high-performer (High end macbook pro) or $3200+ for a high-end gaming laptop with a high-end display (ASUS ROG Zephyrus S GX701)\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: How did we get to the point where laptops and smartphones are in the same price range?\n\nA: A smartphone is a handheld computer that does most of the computing you need at any given moment of the day, occasionally you can use it to make phone calls. A laptop is a more powerful computer, usually, that allows you to do the stuff you can't do with the smartphone. You pay what you pay for a smartphone for the convenience and you pay what you do for a laptop for what it offers. I like having a computer that can also make phone calls in my pocket throughout the day, having a laptop for school/work, and having a desktop setup for everything else.\n\nB: The difference is that most people are buying the top spec smartphones ($1000+), but not nearly as many people buy top spec laptops ($2500+).\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: How did we get to the point where laptops and smartphones are in the same price range?\n\nA: Why aren’t smartphones getting cheaper? I remember buying my first big screen TV, a 1080p 50” plasma for almost $2k. Now all TV’s are much better and much cheaper. Smartphones? The iPhone I bought years ago was cheaper than the iPhones now. Maddening.\n\nB: The difference is that most people are buying the top spec smartphones ($1000+), but not nearly as many people buy top spec laptops ($2500+).\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: So how does the the human brain ignore the second the?\n\nA: Short version: Our brains are tuned for pattern recognition and prediction, not detail. That's also why things that break the expected pattern/outcome can be so jarring. Sometimes it's in a fun way, though. See movie twists, stage magic, joke punchlines and so on. It's a filtering mechanism. Ignore the leaves, see the broken up/partial shape or movement of the predator hiding behind them.\n\nB: We're too used to reading English that we don't actually read every word, but the sentence as a whole. (When I was learning Spanish in school I had to read every word and then combine them to understand what it means)\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: When you stand, the same muscles in your feet fire repeatedly as the pressure on them remains constant. However, when you walk about, the pressure shifts to and from different areas of your foot as the same muscles aren’t working all the time. If you have a sore area on your foot, walking will be less painful than standing as the pressure is on the area for less time\n\nB: I work at a vein surgeon's office. I actually asked him this. Basically, when you are standing, blood flow slows and \"pools\" in your legs due to gravity. But when you walk, your muscles contract and push the blood in your veins and vessels back up into your upper body. On the side note, seasoned military personnels are able to stand at ease for long periods of time because they are actually swaying back and forth very slowly in micro-movements to contract their muscles and relieve the tingling and numb sensation you get when you keep standing for long periods of time. Edit: As others have suggested, not locking your knees is also key Edit 2: As others have mentioned, micro movements could be flexing your calves, distributing weight back and forth between your heels and toes, wiggling your toes, etc. Edit 3: If you have persistent leg problems even without prolonged standing and even after conservative measures (compression stockings, exercise, etc.), I would recommend getting a referral to a vein specialist from your PCP (in the US) to get it properly treated. You may just have bad veins. Whoa! My very first gold. Thank you stranger 😝\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: Your leg veins have one way valves in them. They work when the skeletal muscles around them contract and release. When you are walking around, the flexion/relaxation of the walking muscles are literally pumping the blood back to your torso. When you are standing still, you aren't getting that pumping action naturally. You *could* flex/release your legs intentionally, while standing, but it's not nearly as effective as walking is. Hope that makes sense!\n\nB: I work at a vein surgeon's office. I actually asked him this. Basically, when you are standing, blood flow slows and \"pools\" in your legs due to gravity. But when you walk, your muscles contract and push the blood in your veins and vessels back up into your upper body. On the side note, seasoned military personnels are able to stand at ease for long periods of time because they are actually swaying back and forth very slowly in micro-movements to contract their muscles and relieve the tingling and numb sensation you get when you keep standing for long periods of time. Edit: As others have suggested, not locking your knees is also key Edit 2: As others have mentioned, micro movements could be flexing your calves, distributing weight back and forth between your heels and toes, wiggling your toes, etc. Edit 3: If you have persistent leg problems even without prolonged standing and even after conservative measures (compression stockings, exercise, etc.), I would recommend getting a referral to a vein specialist from your PCP (in the US) to get it properly treated. You may just have bad veins. Whoa! My very first gold. Thank you stranger 😝\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: I work at a vein surgeon's office. I actually asked him this. Basically, when you are standing, blood flow slows and \"pools\" in your legs due to gravity. But when you walk, your muscles contract and push the blood in your veins and vessels back up into your upper body. On the side note, seasoned military personnels are able to stand at ease for long periods of time because they are actually swaying back and forth very slowly in micro-movements to contract their muscles and relieve the tingling and numb sensation you get when you keep standing for long periods of time. Edit: As others have suggested, not locking your knees is also key Edit 2: As others have mentioned, micro movements could be flexing your calves, distributing weight back and forth between your heels and toes, wiggling your toes, etc. Edit 3: If you have persistent leg problems even without prolonged standing and even after conservative measures (compression stockings, exercise, etc.), I would recommend getting a referral to a vein specialist from your PCP (in the US) to get it properly treated. You may just have bad veins. Whoa! My very first gold. Thank you stranger 😝\n\nB: Walking increases blood flow. Standing causes it to pool in your legs. More blood flow means more oxygen to the muscles and more efficient removal of edit: lactic acid buildup. Standing also means keeping your muscles rigid, which is much more stressful on them than simply moving, where periods of contraction and release have points where less energy is being used. If you want an example, try doing slow curls vs fast curls. Your muscles will fatigue faster from slow tension than quick tension. edit: This really applies to any muscle groups used in moving around.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: I work at a vein surgeon's office. I actually asked him this. Basically, when you are standing, blood flow slows and \"pools\" in your legs due to gravity. But when you walk, your muscles contract and push the blood in your veins and vessels back up into your upper body. On the side note, seasoned military personnels are able to stand at ease for long periods of time because they are actually swaying back and forth very slowly in micro-movements to contract their muscles and relieve the tingling and numb sensation you get when you keep standing for long periods of time. Edit: As others have suggested, not locking your knees is also key Edit 2: As others have mentioned, micro movements could be flexing your calves, distributing weight back and forth between your heels and toes, wiggling your toes, etc. Edit 3: If you have persistent leg problems even without prolonged standing and even after conservative measures (compression stockings, exercise, etc.), I would recommend getting a referral to a vein specialist from your PCP (in the US) to get it properly treated. You may just have bad veins. Whoa! My very first gold. Thank you stranger 😝\n\nB: Also your mind is more active as you walk so it's focused less on discomfort. Different hormones are released too and this also affects the way your brain is working in response to discomfort. So me boxers continue fighting with a broken hand. Some runners with sprains and maybe fractures. Sometimes people who just work hard forget to eat.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: Blood in your body is pumped by the heart. This moves it out, away from your heart. The blood vessels that lead away from your heart have valves that keep the blood from flowing backwards. As blood reaches the farthest part of your body it is separated into many tiny tubes that supply all the parts of your body. This causes the blood to slow down A LOT. When blood goes to return to the heart there are valves in the in those blood vessels which help to prevent blood from flowing backwards. Also, because it has now slowed down it does not move back to the heart very easily, the forward pressure is much lower than in your arteries. This allows gravity to overcome them and allow blood to flow backwards (this is less common in a healthy person). The tubes in your legs that send blood back to the heart are surrounded by your leg muscles. When you walk they are squeezed and this pushes the blood back to your heart. Without the extra pressure from your leg muscles pumping it can be difficult to overcome the force of gravity pulling downwards on the blood. When you stand those muscles aren't pushing the blood so it becomes harder to move it. This means that the old, used up blood, is stuck in the lowest point of your body. This is your feet. Because the blood is used up it has no oxygen to keep the muscles in your feet healthy. When your body senses there is not enough oxygen it sends signals to your brain that trick it into thinking there is pain. This causes you to try and move the part of the body that is in pain which ideally allows fresh blood to flow in with new oxygen. This is also why it feels like your chest burns when you hold your breath.\n\nB: I work at a vein surgeon's office. I actually asked him this. Basically, when you are standing, blood flow slows and \"pools\" in your legs due to gravity. But when you walk, your muscles contract and push the blood in your veins and vessels back up into your upper body. On the side note, seasoned military personnels are able to stand at ease for long periods of time because they are actually swaying back and forth very slowly in micro-movements to contract their muscles and relieve the tingling and numb sensation you get when you keep standing for long periods of time. Edit: As others have suggested, not locking your knees is also key Edit 2: As others have mentioned, micro movements could be flexing your calves, distributing weight back and forth between your heels and toes, wiggling your toes, etc. Edit 3: If you have persistent leg problems even without prolonged standing and even after conservative measures (compression stockings, exercise, etc.), I would recommend getting a referral to a vein specialist from your PCP (in the US) to get it properly treated. You may just have bad veins. Whoa! My very first gold. Thank you stranger 😝\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: Walking increases blood flow. Standing causes it to pool in your legs. More blood flow means more oxygen to the muscles and more efficient removal of edit: lactic acid buildup. Standing also means keeping your muscles rigid, which is much more stressful on them than simply moving, where periods of contraction and release have points where less energy is being used. If you want an example, try doing slow curls vs fast curls. Your muscles will fatigue faster from slow tension than quick tension. edit: This really applies to any muscle groups used in moving around.\n\nB: Your leg veins have one way valves in them. They work when the skeletal muscles around them contract and release. When you are walking around, the flexion/relaxation of the walking muscles are literally pumping the blood back to your torso. When you are standing still, you aren't getting that pumping action naturally. You *could* flex/release your legs intentionally, while standing, but it's not nearly as effective as walking is. Hope that makes sense!\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be a given Reddit post and two comments for the Reddit post from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which of the comments is more preferred by human given the following criteria.\n\nYou need to consider following criteria\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nGiven above information, please answer which of the comment is more preferred by human, A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: Also your mind is more active as you walk so it's focused less on discomfort. Different hormones are released too and this also affects the way your brain is working in response to discomfort. So me boxers continue fighting with a broken hand. Some runners with sprains and maybe fractures. Sometimes people who just work hard forget to eat.\n\nB: Your leg veins have one way valves in them. They work when the skeletal muscles around them contract and release. When you are walking around, the flexion/relaxation of the walking muscles are literally pumping the blood back to your torso. When you are standing still, you aren't getting that pumping action naturally. You *could* flex/release your legs intentionally, while standing, but it's not nearly as effective as walking is. Hope that makes sense!\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "B", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will be provided with a Reddit post and two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more preferred by humans based on the following criteria: Relevance to the Post, Clarity and Coherence, Depth and Thoughtfulness, Positive Tone and Respectful Language, Correctness and Accuracy, Natural Language and Tone, Conciseness\n\nGiven the information above, please select either A or B:\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: Your leg veins have one way valves in them. They work when the skeletal muscles around them contract and release. When you are walking around, the flexion/relaxation of the walking muscles are literally pumping the blood back to your torso. When you are standing still, you aren't getting that pumping action naturally. You *could* flex/release your legs intentionally, while standing, but it's not nearly as effective as walking is. Hope that makes sense!\n\nB: Blood in your body is pumped by the heart. This moves it out, away from your heart. The blood vessels that lead away from your heart have valves that keep the blood from flowing backwards. As blood reaches the farthest part of your body it is separated into many tiny tubes that supply all the parts of your body. This causes the blood to slow down A LOT. When blood goes to return to the heart there are valves in the in those blood vessels which help to prevent blood from flowing backwards. Also, because it has now slowed down it does not move back to the heart very easily, the forward pressure is much lower than in your arteries. This allows gravity to overcome them and allow blood to flow backwards (this is less common in a healthy person). The tubes in your legs that send blood back to the heart are surrounded by your leg muscles. When you walk they are squeezed and this pushes the blood back to your heart. Without the extra pressure from your leg muscles pumping it can be difficult to overcome the force of gravity pulling downwards on the blood. When you stand those muscles aren't pushing the blood so it becomes harder to move it. This means that the old, used up blood, is stuck in the lowest point of your body. This is your feet. Because the blood is used up it has no oxygen to keep the muscles in your feet healthy. When your body senses there is not enough oxygen it sends signals to your brain that trick it into thinking there is pain. This causes you to try and move the part of the body that is in pain which ideally allows fresh blood to flow in with new oxygen. This is also why it feels like your chest burns when you hold your breath.\n\nPlease respond with only A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]

[ { "content": "You will receive a Reddit post along with two comments from the subreddit explainlikeimfive. Your task is to determine which comment is more favored by humans based on the following criteria:\n\n Relevance to the Post\n Clarity and Coherence\n Depth and Thoughtfulness\n Positive Tone and Respectful Language\n Correctness and Accuracy\n Natural Language and Tone\n Conciseness\n\nAfter considering the given information, please indicate which comment is preferred: A or B?\nReddit post: Explain like I'm five years old: Why can people walk many miles without discomfort, but when they stand for more than 15 minutes or so, they get uncomfortable?\n\nA: Walking increases blood flow. Standing causes it to pool in your legs. More blood flow means more oxygen to the muscles and more efficient removal of edit: lactic acid buildup. Standing also means keeping your muscles rigid, which is much more stressful on them than simply moving, where periods of contraction and release have points where less energy is being used. If you want an example, try doing slow curls vs fast curls. Your muscles will fatigue faster from slow tension than quick tension. edit: This really applies to any muscle groups used in moving around.\n\nB: Also your mind is more active as you walk so it's focused less on discomfort. Different hormones are released too and this also affects the way your brain is working in response to discomfort. So me boxers continue fighting with a broken hand. Some runners with sprains and maybe fractures. Sometimes people who just work hard forget to eat.\n\nPlease respond with either A or B.", "role": "user" }, { "content": "A", "role": "assistant" } ]