Search
Language
Why the science of nutrition is so complicated
Table of Contents
1. The science of nutrition is young
In the 5th century B.C.E. In ancient Greece, pigs were used to study anatomy, and experiments were also performed on embryonic chicken. In 1853 DNA was first described. It was not until 1932 that vitamin C was isolated and evidence was presented that its deficiency was the cause of disease. Wilbur Atwater estimated the energy value of carbohydrates, fats, and proteins. In the 20th century, in combination with medical science, chemistry, and physics, the science of the embryo has not yet been discovered, so we will certainly have to wait for the next breakthrough discovery.2. Every organism is different
It's not that they don't have values, but we can't relate their results to people. It makes it impossible to define a rule that will work in every case. It'll be determined by dividing body weight by kilograms by square meters of height. The lower indicator will tell you about the lack of evidence, the higher the overweight or obesity. The athletes have more muscle mass, which is heavier than the fat tissue. However, there's no reason for the diet to be adjusted individually. Part of the research is done on animals. The differences can be based on a number of physical activity or other factors, e.g. the physical code can be made up of genes, microbiota, or lifestyle.3. Difficulty making measurements
By looking at the nutritional value tables, we can find out how much energy the app uses, for example, Marchevka. But how can we be sure that the carrot that we grow in the garden has the same composition as the one we buy at the grocery store or in the supermarket? There are several different databases that give the nutrient value of the products. When we use the calorie counting app, we check the basis from which the app is using. The participants are asked to complete a survey in which they say what and how much they have eaten. But the participants are often told that they can hide different information about the substance of the essential processes.4. Food does not cause immediate effects
Therefore, studies on the effects of food on health take a very long time a few years or even decades. This makes it very difficult to analyze and draw conclusions from such studies. It is obvious that the bone will not improve immediately after eating a portion of the face, but regular consumption of lean powder for a long time can protect you from osteoporosis.5. It's a conflict of interest
The point is to see if there are financial relationships between institutions that could benefit from publishing specific results, but if we find a paper that talks about, say, the health benefits of white sugar, and it turns out that it's being funded by a sugar producer, we should be skeptical about the results. When reviewing scientific research, it is worth noting whether there is a conflict of interest. Of course, conflicts of interest do not always mean that the research has been conducted unfairly. It is important not to blindly believe such conclusions and compare them with the results of other scientific work on the subject. The information should always be included in the research.6. Mistakes in the interpretation
When we use publicly available sources, we need to be even more careful about what we know when we analyze scientific papers. Unfortunately, it's often the case that information about sensational discoveries is published on the Internet that has little to do with the actual findings of the study. When we read about food science on the internet, it is a relatively new field, very complex and extremely challenging. Let's not be fooled by the catchphrases and easy solutions. Research requires knowledge. It's unfortunate that it often happens that there's information on sensational findings that doesn't have much in common with actual research findings.
