4 ms·

Aside from macronutrients being too broad to be entirely meaningful. The underlying assumption that there is an optimal ratio already seems naïve. Humans proba

• simplicio 3y ago
  Alternatively, I think the idea that outside some extremely broad parameters (not eating a diet lacking essential vitamins, under-eating to the point of malnourishment or over-eating to the point of severe obesity, etc) there are no particular nutritional needs is under-examined. Nutritional Science seems based on the idea that relatively minor tweaks to diet can influence health outcomes. After several decades of failing to find what those tweaks might be, it always seems strange to me that people don't seem to consider that they might just not exist, and that the human body is fine with whatever food it gets, within some broad range.
  • Madmallard 3y ago
    if you're deficient in any of the vitamins or minerals you will develop clinical symptoms. seems pretty believable to me.
    • simplicio 3y ago
      Hence my including "a diet lacking essential vitamins". But nutritional science figured out stuff like "preventing scurvy" pretty well several decades (or in some cases, centuries) ago. It's further attempts to refine diet to promote health that don't seem to have really led to any really actionable results, to the point that it seems worth considering that it might just not be possible.
      • Madmallard 3y ago
        okay well eating lots of fruits and vegetables and some meats is a natural step from essential vitamins and minerals actually. If you don't eat meat, it will be hard to get iron and B12 and carnitine and some other things. It will also be harder to get enough calories.
        • tsimionescu 3y ago
          The amount of most vitamins and minerals you need are easily found in virtually any diet, including eating every day at McDonald's.
      • majkinetor 3y ago
        Not something proponents of Orthomolecular medicine would agree on. That entire branch exists soly becuase of failure of standard medicine to use required doses. Ignoring those researchers doesn't make entire thing untrue. As an example, vitamin C level for optimal health is vastly higher then vitamin C levels needed to prevent scurvy (which is total meltdown of the organism).
        • tsimionescu 3y ago
          Replacing nutrition science with some quackery is not any better - even quackery supported by one of the fathers of modern medicine. The metabolism of vitamin C in particular is pretty well understood, and no magical benefits of getting huge doses has ever been proven to have any of the claimed positive effects (despite many prominent supporters' efforts, including Mr Pauling).
• wizofaus 3y ago
  Except we continue to see population-wide trends in health that are surely linked to changes in average diet over the last 100 years or so. But it's certainly possible it's far less to do with ratios of simple/complex carbs, protein & fat than widely seems to be believed and indeed linked more to either micronutrients (or lack thereof), or worse, industrial chemicals that have made their way into the food chain. Either way, even accepting variation between individuals, it's surely worth understanding better what general principles can guide how to advise on what diet and food industry changes are necessary to address public health concerns.
  • hutzlibu 3y ago
    You surely can say some things about "average". But someone working physical still has greatly different food needs, than someone only working in an office and being a couch potato afterwards. Or for example I usually avoid sausage and fat meat as it is heavy on the stomach and weight. But the last days I have been in the mountains, walking over ice and snow. Fat meat was excellent, because with the cold, I burned lots of energy.
• fuzzfactor 3y ago
  >Humans probably have wildly different nutrition needs depending Also might have something to do with how many tens of millennia some peoples' isolated ancestors spent surviving on relatively limited local items available or cultivated, compared to what is now considered mainstream. In my case I lowered my metabolism considerably so I could thrive in Texas without air conditioning in the summer. When everyone else was complaining about the heat this week, all I could do is remind them "it's not even summer yet". Definitely was not as much progress during the first decade.