5 ms·

I think it is fairly obvious that a healthy balanced diet, which is carefully balanced to provide the nutrients our body needs is highly preferable. This the

I think it is fairly obvious that a healthy balanced diet, which is carefully balanced to provide the nutrients our body needs is highly preferable. This the composition of needed nutrients can vary greatly for person to person. But in general, a good diet is the way to go. On that is also adapted to change conditions. For instance, the lack of sunlight in Scandinavian countries during the winter, which makes consuming foods rich in Vitamin D is important. However, a lot of people are not motivated and/or privileged¹ enough to do so. A question that then must be asked, if you are not able to compose and consume a healthy diet does a multivitamin have a positive effect? ¹ Using this term may seem controversial but I think it is accurate. If a person is poor and does not have food safety the fight is to find enough food. Not finding the exact food needed for a balanced diet. In general, the food that food banks give out will not be able to provide a proper balance. Add to that though that multivitamins can be expensive and is also out of reach. I have never heard of a food bank providing multivitamins. (even though it would probably be a good idea) Then some people will feel that they do not have the time. Some people have not learned to cook well. Eating healthy was a lot easier when I lived in the US the availability of a broad selection of fruits, vegetables and nuts is great. Norway has in general a small selection of all of the above.

sandworm101 2y ago
Or if someone has some need other than the average. Someone diagnosed with low iron can change thier diet to encorporate lots of red meat, kilos of it, or just pop an iron pill once a week.
whitehexagon 2y ago
I think part of the problem is that a 'balanced diet' is also pretty poor in micro nutrients/vitamins/etc because modern farming techniques mean the soil itself is pretty exhausted, with just the bare minimum being added back to yield the next crop.
- zemvpferreira 2y ago
  I get the sentiment but this is very much an exaggeration. Vegetables might have 5% to 30% less micronutrients than 100 years ago if you believe in the accuracy of micronutrient measurements from 1940 (you shouldn't). But there's good evidence that the soil isn't to blame. Rather, we have switched to varietals which grow quicker and have less time to pull good stuff up from the ground. In any case, vegetables are now many times cheaper and more accessible than before. As a species we have hundredfold better access to nutrition than a century ago. The fact is most people feed themselves mostly on flour and oil. That's what's causing a malnutrition epidemic, not poorer vegetables.

sandworm101 2y ago

Or if someone has some need other than the average. Someone diagnosed with low iron can change thier diet to encorporate lots of red meat, kilos of it, or just pop an iron pill once a week.

whitehexagon 2y ago

I think part of the problem is that a 'balanced diet' is also pretty poor in micro nutrients/vitamins/etc because modern farming techniques mean the soil itself is pretty exhausted, with just the bare minimum being added back to yield the next crop.

zemvpferreira 2y ago
I get the sentiment but this is very much an exaggeration. Vegetables might have 5% to 30% less micronutrients than 100 years ago if you believe in the accuracy of micronutrient measurements from 1940 (you shouldn't). But there's good evidence that the soil isn't to blame. Rather, we have switched to varietals which grow quicker and have less time to pull good stuff up from the ground. In any case, vegetables are now many times cheaper and more accessible than before. As a species we have hundredfold better access to nutrition than a century ago. The fact is most people feed themselves mostly on flour and oil. That's what's causing a malnutrition epidemic, not poorer vegetables.