4 ms·

It sill blows my mind how little we know about our body. We are aiming to sent someone to Mars, but we can't figure out what to eat. It seems the best default

by lukasm 11y ago

It sill blows my mind how little we know about our body. We are aiming to sent someone to Mars, but we can't figure out what to eat. It seems the best default is to try to simulate what we've been eating for a past 50000 years and modify accordingly. When I first tried slow carb diet I lost 5kg in 3 weeks and my general well being improved. I tried it again, but the effect wasn't that strong.

debacle 11y ago
There's a massive amount of politics and bias involved in "what to eat."
- visakanv 11y ago
  Correct. Big sugar in particular is the major influence to watch out for. They used to literally have ads suggesting that people eat sugar as a pick-me-up: http://cf.collectorsweekly.com/uploads/2012/08/sugar-ads1.jpg http://cf.collectorsweekly.com/uploads/2012/08/sugar-ads1.jp...
  - hga 11y ago
    That's a total misrepresentation of those advertisements. The concept, which on its face is worthy of consideration, and is explained in the ads, is to consume a small amount of sugar an hour or so before your main meal to trick your body into feeling satiated before you reach for "those extra helpings at mealtime". Judging by the items they show being consumed, they're talking about ~100 calories. And when they came out, I found them useful to put the calorie content of sugar into context, "18 calories per teaspoon". Given the insane anti-sugar propaganda of the time (and ever since), the ads provided some real value. Now, I don't know if the theory is correct, it doesn't address my eating issues, but it's very much not "eat sugar as a pick-me-up".
CuriouslyC 11y ago
The problem is that nutrition research is very fragmented, and most researchers study diseased states. Thus, you have people who study nutritional metabolism related to diebetes, heart disease, obesity, high blood pressure, etc. Additionally, most of the researchers know a few metabolic pathways relevant to their research extremely well, but have very limited knowledge of the metabolic network as a whole. It is unfortunate that very few researchers study nutrition as it relates to longevity or optimal human performance. There's very little money available for that type of work, and well-controlled nutrition studies on humans are expensive.

by lukasm 11y ago

debacle 11y ago

There's a massive amount of politics and bias involved in "what to eat."

visakanv 11y ago
Correct. Big sugar in particular is the major influence to watch out for. They used to literally have ads suggesting that people eat sugar as a pick-me-up: http://cf.collectorsweekly.com/uploads/2012/08/sugar-ads1.jpg http://cf.collectorsweekly.com/uploads/2012/08/sugar-ads1.jp...
- hga 11y ago
  That's a total misrepresentation of those advertisements. The concept, which on its face is worthy of consideration, and is explained in the ads, is to consume a small amount of sugar an hour or so before your main meal to trick your body into feeling satiated before you reach for "those extra helpings at mealtime". Judging by the items they show being consumed, they're talking about ~100 calories. And when they came out, I found them useful to put the calorie content of sugar into context, "18 calories per teaspoon". Given the insane anti-sugar propaganda of the time (and ever since), the ads provided some real value. Now, I don't know if the theory is correct, it doesn't address my eating issues, but it's very much not "eat sugar as a pick-me-up".

CuriouslyC 11y ago

The problem is that nutrition research is very fragmented, and most researchers study diseased states. Thus, you have people who study nutritional metabolism related to diebetes, heart disease, obesity, high blood pressure, etc. Additionally, most of the researchers know a few metabolic pathways relevant to their research extremely well, but have very limited knowledge of the metabolic network as a whole. It is unfortunate that very few researchers study nutrition as it relates to longevity or optimal human performance. There's very little money available for that type of work, and well-controlled nutrition studies on humans are expensive.