8 ms·

Food for thought - Eat your way to a better brain

36 points by robg 18y ago

streety 18y ago
The article appears to focus on the "Fernando Gómez-Pinilla, a fish-loving professor of neurosurgery and physiological science at the University of California" and a paper he has recently published. http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v9/n7/full/nrn2421.html http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v9/n7/full/nrn2421.html
acgourley 18y ago
I know this sounds terribly lazy, but the day when I'll simply get all these benefits from a pill tailored to my own bodies needs will be a sweet day indeed.
- dhuck 18y ago
  I use to agree until I started to enjoy cooking... (cheaper, healthier, and all that.) Eating can bring a lot of joy to your life, preparing meals and enjoying with someone seems (imho) to contribute to a better, more well rounded lifestyle (equaling more productive hacking session.) ... food for thought (ducks).
spon 18y ago
When I see articles that attribute far-reaching health consequences to specific chemicals like anti-oxidants -- which are rarely tested in isolation from other compounds -- I'm reminded of a quote from Gary Taubes: "If public health research functioned like some of the harder sciences -- high energy physics being the one I know best -- then researchers would be ridiculed and perhaps even run out of the field for over-interpreting their evidence or publicly presenting the results of sloppy experiments or basing claims on premature evidence and none of this would have happened."
- robg 18y ago
  Unfortunately, human research isn't as simple - you actually have to worry about the health consequences as well as the benefits. But correlations can be very meaningful. For instance, cross-cultural studies w/r to diets can be illuminating even as there are no experiments being run. Still, I'd place my bets, and my life, on fresh foods - high in anti-oxidants - over processed ones. The beauty is it ain't rocket science. And better, good diets can control and even inhibit pathologies (diabetes, heart disease, etc.).
  - streety 18y ago
    I don't think the problem is one of complexity as such but more of being more complex than people imagine. Very few people have any knowledge of high energy physics, so only those who actually know what they're talking about offer an opinion, but everyone knows about food and diets, so everyone has an opinion.
- asdflkj 18y ago
  On that note--does anyone know where to find basic information on nutrition that's not full of bullshit?
  - robg 18y ago
    See a nutritionist. They'll go through your diet and help to plan healthier, and often tastier, alternatives. The best ones are like diet coaches.
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
      - deleted 18y ago
        [deleted]
    - SwellJoe 18y ago
      Valid advice if you've got serious persistent problems with food, like overeating, junk food addictions, etc. But, if you already have a good diet and have no food-related health issues, then a nutritionist will likely be of limited utility--certainly less than a few hours of research on the Internet (careful research...citations needed). Certainly there are some nutritionists who are on the cutting edge of the field and follow the latest research (and parse it with knowledge that most popular science coverage of food is bullshit), but I've come upon a few who mingled current trends with "ancient wisdom" a little too much and end up being purveyors of "alternative medicine". A friend of mine went on a huge soy kick for a year or two, because her nutritionist had bought into the "soy is a magical cancer preventative" hype. We now know with confidence that soy in many forms is actually kinda hard on the body (hormone producing chemicals in food are something that should be treated with caution, and not consumed in large quantities without careful study), and the research that indicated cancer prevention was probably overblown and certainly not specific enough. So, see a nutritionist if you want, but take all advice with a grain of salt. Nobody knows everything, and moderation is probably the best choice when in doubt. (Though anyone who tells that you should eat more fruits and vegetables is almost certainly right. Moderation is probably not a concern with broccoli and carrots and blueberries.)
jmtulloss 18y ago
Pfft, coffee and peanuts does me just fine.
AlfaWolph 18y ago
They focus on fish a lot but they say nothing about the mercury content.
- streety 18y ago
  The only fish they mention is salmon. I'm not entirely sure all the health issues surrounding intensively farmed salmon have been established yet. I would say mercury is only one aspect we should be concerned about.
grendel 18y ago
The Omnivore's Dilemma is a must read. http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meals/dp/0143038583/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221181170&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meal...

36 points by robg 18y ago

The article appears to focus on the "Fernando Gómez-Pinilla, a fish-loving professor of neurosurgery and physiological science at the University of California" and a paper he has recently published. http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v9/n7/full/nrn2421.html http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v9/n7/full/nrn2421.html

acgourley 18y ago

I know this sounds terribly lazy, but the day when I'll simply get all these benefits from a pill tailored to my own bodies needs will be a sweet day indeed.

dhuck 18y ago
I use to agree until I started to enjoy cooking... (cheaper, healthier, and all that.) Eating can bring a lot of joy to your life, preparing meals and enjoying with someone seems (imho) to contribute to a better, more well rounded lifestyle (equaling more productive hacking session.) ... food for thought (ducks).

spon 18y ago

When I see articles that attribute far-reaching health consequences to specific chemicals like anti-oxidants -- which are rarely tested in isolation from other compounds -- I'm reminded of a quote from Gary Taubes: "If public health research functioned like some of the harder sciences -- high energy physics being the one I know best -- then researchers would be ridiculed and perhaps even run out of the field for over-interpreting their evidence or publicly presenting the results of sloppy experiments or basing claims on premature evidence and none of this would have happened."

robg 18y ago
Unfortunately, human research isn't as simple - you actually have to worry about the health consequences as well as the benefits. But correlations can be very meaningful. For instance, cross-cultural studies w/r to diets can be illuminating even as there are no experiments being run. Still, I'd place my bets, and my life, on fresh foods - high in anti-oxidants - over processed ones. The beauty is it ain't rocket science. And better, good diets can control and even inhibit pathologies (diabetes, heart disease, etc.).
- streety 18y ago
  I don't think the problem is one of complexity as such but more of being more complex than people imagine. Very few people have any knowledge of high energy physics, so only those who actually know what they're talking about offer an opinion, but everyone knows about food and diets, so everyone has an opinion.
asdflkj 18y ago
On that note--does anyone know where to find basic information on nutrition that's not full of bullshit?
- robg 18y ago
  See a nutritionist. They'll go through your diet and help to plan healthier, and often tastier, alternatives. The best ones are like diet coaches.
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
    - deleted 18y ago
      [deleted]
  - SwellJoe 18y ago
    Valid advice if you've got serious persistent problems with food, like overeating, junk food addictions, etc. But, if you already have a good diet and have no food-related health issues, then a nutritionist will likely be of limited utility--certainly less than a few hours of research on the Internet (careful research...citations needed). Certainly there are some nutritionists who are on the cutting edge of the field and follow the latest research (and parse it with knowledge that most popular science coverage of food is bullshit), but I've come upon a few who mingled current trends with "ancient wisdom" a little too much and end up being purveyors of "alternative medicine". A friend of mine went on a huge soy kick for a year or two, because her nutritionist had bought into the "soy is a magical cancer preventative" hype. We now know with confidence that soy in many forms is actually kinda hard on the body (hormone producing chemicals in food are something that should be treated with caution, and not consumed in large quantities without careful study), and the research that indicated cancer prevention was probably overblown and certainly not specific enough. So, see a nutritionist if you want, but take all advice with a grain of salt. Nobody knows everything, and moderation is probably the best choice when in doubt. (Though anyone who tells that you should eat more fruits and vegetables is almost certainly right. Moderation is probably not a concern with broccoli and carrots and blueberries.)

jmtulloss 18y ago

Pfft, coffee and peanuts does me just fine.

AlfaWolph 18y ago

They focus on fish a lot but they say nothing about the mercury content.

streety 18y ago
The only fish they mention is salmon. I'm not entirely sure all the health issues surrounding intensively farmed salmon have been established yet. I would say mercury is only one aspect we should be concerned about.

grendel 18y ago

The Omnivore's Dilemma is a must read. http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meals/dp/0143038583/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221181170&sr=8-1 http://www.amazon.com/Omnivores-Dilemma-Natural-History-Meal...