About Us







Heres why nutrition science is always contradicting itself – The Takeout

Posted: March 31, 2020 at 10:44 pm


Photo: JGI/Jamie Grill (Getty Images)

Follow food research long enough and youll start to feel insane. At least thats how I feel, and that seems to be how medical journalist Clare Wilson feels, too. Her recent piece in the South China Morning Post magazine called Food science: should we believe anything we read about nutrition? dissects the methodology of nutritional research and how the media picks and chooses food-related stories to publish. Itll either make you question everything or, if youre like me, affirm your long-held belief that new/terrifying research on heretofore healthy foods should be mostly ignored. We highly recommend the read.

Wilson opens with eggs, the perfect example of our collective seesaw in popular food science. Eggs were always a breakfast staple until the 1960s, when we discovered that cholesterol is bad for us. Eggs are therefore bad; R.I.P. eggs. Then, in the 80s, we found out that cholesterol in food doesnt really affect our heart health. Eggs are back onhooray for eggs! But wait, no. In 2019, more research arose that found the cholesterol in eggs is, once again, ravaging our bodies.

According to Wilson, there are tons of problems in diet research, one of which is that its pretty much impossible to have a control group. Nutritionists cant ask people to change their diet for years on end (or know that these participants have stuck to it). So instead, they have subjects complete food diaries and try to draw conclusions from that. But there are so many other factorsclass and income level being huge onesthat impact our health beyond what we eat. Money and diet are so intertwined that its difficult for researchers to tease them apart. For example, Wilson writes, even if blueberries do not affect heart attack rates, those who eat more of them will have fewer heart attacks, simply because eating blueberries is a badge of middle-class prosperity.

Another big factor is publication bias. Food journalists (like myself) are so much more interested in studies that find a link between two things. Hot sauce gives you cancer is a more gripping headline than, say, Diet is a complicated thing that mostly has to do with privilege and access but maybe try to eat balanced meals. Even within the research community itself, similar biases exist. There have been so many studies at this point that anyone can just cherry-pick whichever studies fit their theories. Plus, virtually no diet studies can apply to a persons entire life. Its an imperfect system, to say the least.

G/O Media may get a commission

Anyway, Im blathering, but please read this piece, then go ahead and enjoy some delicious, cholesterol-ridden eggs.

Visit link:
Heres why nutrition science is always contradicting itself - The Takeout

Related Post

No Comments

No comments yet.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.