Later On

A blog written for those whose interests more or less match mine.

Ignoring science

leave a comment »

I have a friend who simply ignores any scientific findings regarding food. (I was reminding of this by the post below on oily fish’s being beneficial for eyesight.) Because in some cases later findings superseded earlier findings, she has decided that no finding can be trusted at all. (Oddly, though, she seems to trust findings regarding medications.)

Obviously, I believe that (1) it’s worthwhile to pay attention to what science finds out about the effects of food, and (2) one should keep up with the findings in case later discoveries invalidate earlier statements.

Clearly, the importance of omega-3—and omega-3 in an appropriate ratio with omega-6—is now well-established. I doubt that this should be overturned. As the article below notes, however, this refers to omega-3 taken as food, not pure omega-3 supplements (although I do in fact take 2 g wild salmon oil in capsules with breakfast and with dinner): the efficacy of omega-3 as a supplement is not established (nor disproven, for that matter). Antioxidants taken as supplements, though, have been shown to be worthless—I have blogged about that here and here.

Similarly, some people get the feeling that no foods are good for you—this despite many, many findings on the health benefits of many foods, particularly colorful vegetables. Somehow these people remember only warnings about foods and never positive findings about foods.

My belief: pay attention and keep up to date.

Written by Leisureguy

8 August 2008 at 10:28 am

Posted in Food, Health, Science

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: