16 ms·
The title is implying tasting good = healthy.
by overcast 4y ago
The title is implying tasting good = healthy.
- yjftsjthsd-h 4y agoMy point is that there's room for a little more nuance than that; "your body likes X because it's good for you" doesn't imply a universal rule, just a specific correlation.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- TulliusCicero 4y agoIt's really more like tasting good = evolutionarily useful.
- carlmr 4y agoWhich is true for sugar. It's good if you get a few grams of sugar while running around the forest all day. It's not good to get half a pound of sugar from big gulp softdrinks while you're sitting in traffic.
- beebmam 4y agoNot necessarily, even in the evolutionary biology model. Something can taste good to humans entirely by accident, and be evolutionarily neutral (or even a small amount negative). Just like the reason men have nipples.
- strken 4y agoThis is probably more true of sweet-tasting poisons like lead diacetate than sugars.
- fortran77 4y agoThis is one of the dangerous concepts pushed by the “Intuitive Eating” pro-obesity folks.
- TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y agoWhen in doubt: Paracelsus! “All things are poison and nothing is without poison; only the dose makes a thing not a poison.”