The Religion of Nutrition

I’ve been writing about nutrition for 30-some years. As I listen to people, I often hear less science and more of what could best be described as a variety of belief systems.

There are the vegetarian, vegan, and macrobiotic sects. There’s the church of low-fat eating. And there’s the pervasive belief that everything boils down to calories in and calories out, with exercise being the penance for overeating.

But the fact is, there’s very little science to support many common nutrition beliefs. They’re just beliefs. And having millions of adherents or thousands of experts repeat the same mantras doesn’t make these beliefs truer.

I know this sounds like heresy to many of you. And I’m not trying to offend anyone’s nutritional or religious sensibilities. But the only food we definitely know we were meant to consume is breast milk, in infancy.

In anthropology, the term “belief system” is usually used to describe a religion. And when it comes to nutrition, many scientists and consumers are so wedded to their beliefs that they’re not interested in adjusting their beliefs in response to new scientific findings.

I’ll give you three examples.

Saturated Fat. Millions of people believe that low-saturated fat diets will prevent heart disease. But the research now shows the opposite to be true. Saturated fat is either neutral or protective, according to an impressive body of research. It’s the refined carbs and sugars and the trans fats that seem to be the real problem in cardiovascular risk.

Why do so many people still believe that saturated fat is bad? It’s a matter of belief — shaped by studies that failed to factor in the effects of carbs, sugars, and trans fats, as well as publication bias favoring the sat-fat-is-bad belief.

Calories. Nearly everyone believes that, to lose weight, you have to either eat less or exercise more. But different types of calories prompt different biological responses. Nutrients that trigger insulin — think carbs and sugars — are more likely to result in weight gain, compared with protein. Protein has little effect on insulin.

The calorie idea was based on energy transfer in steam engines and the 1st Law of Thermodynamics. Biological systems — you are a biological system — are far less efficient and are governed by the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.

Vegetarian diets. If you look at the history of human cultures, as anthropologists and other scientists have done, you’ll realize that there have been no completely vegetarian cultures. People simply didn’t have the luxury to be so picky about food until relatively recently. Yes, veggies are good for health, but so is unadulterated animal protein. Biologically, we’re designed as omnivores.

Vegetarianisms and its many forms are a belief system. Understand that I have no issue with any sensible vegetarian. However, I’ve met many vegetarians who don’t eat vegetables and prefer sugary soft drinks, bagels, and muffins. Should any of us be surprised that they are often overweight and have a lot of health problems?

Again, I’m not trying to offend anyone or their beliefs. Rather, I’d like to encourage people to gain a better understanding of what shapes their nutritional beliefs and to remain open to where the scientific evidence leads.

SOME REFERENCES:
Siri-Tarino PW, Sun Q, H FB, Krauss RM. Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies evaluating the association of saturated fat with cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2010;91:535-545.

Siri-Tarino PW, Sun Q, H FB, Krauss RM. Saturated fat, carbohydrate, and cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2010;91:502-509.

Feinman RD, Fine EJ. “A calorie is a calorie” violates the second law of thermodynamics. Nutrition Journal 2004;3:9-13.

Feinman RD, Fine EJ. Nonequilibrium thermodynamics and energy efficiency in weight loss diets. Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, 2007;4:27 doi:10.1186/1742-4682-4-27.

Eaton SB, Eaton SB III, Konner MJ, et al. An evolutionary perspective enhances understanding of human nutritional requirements. Journal of Nutrition, June 1996;126:1732-40.

O'Keefe JH Jr, Cordain L. Cardiovascular disease resulting from a diet and lifestyle at odds with our Paleolithic genome: how to become a 21st-century hunter-gatherer. Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 2004;79:101-108.

Stepping Back from Political Fanaticism

I live in Tucson, Arizona, just a few miles from where Congresswoman Gabrielle "Gabby" Giffords was shot in the head at a public meet and greet on January 8. Six people were killed, including a nine-year-old girl, and 12 (including Giffords) were wounded. Giffords is one of the sweetest people imaginable, someone who somehow remained untainted by the vicious tone of American politics. A democrat, she always worked with the republican party to get things done. This is the way politics should operate in achieving something for the common good.

The gunman was obviously nuts - would a sane person praise both "Mein Kampf" and "The Communist Manifesto" and then shoot 20 people? Our county sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, summed things up accurately when he stated that Arizona had become a "mecca for prejudice and bigotry." This was the latest event that put Arizona's nuttiness on the national stage. Too many people here in Arizona and around the country now feel it's socially acceptable to be totally unhinged and scream and shove, call elected representatives names, and, in this case, shoot away. Arizona suffers from a serious case of hardening of the attitudes, and Sheriff Dupnik is a sane voice in an insane state.

My own politics are left of center on most issues. (If you disagree, simply respect my views.) I am, however, a gun owner - but I'm not a hothead or wacko or paranoid. (My guns are strictly for self-defense, something suggested decades about by the two most liberal people I knew back then.) However, I am critical of many gun owners and the gun-owner community, where paranoia runs deep. Arizona has always been on the fringe and has had more than it's share of wacky politicians.

Thanks to a right-wing dominated legislature, and a right-wing governor, it is now legal for anyone over 18 to carry guns openly or concealed in Arizona; no training is required. This means it's more difficult to get a driver's license or a bottle of beer than to buy a gun and carry it under your shirt. (I've opted to go through gun training twice.) Now, the republican state government wants to allow teachers and students to be able to carry guns on college campuses. It's totally insane. Welcome to the modern day Tombstone and the OK Corral.

In response, some local talk radio hosts ranted about how inappropriate Sheriff Dupnik's comments about hatred and bigotry were, and call-ins spouted their own vitriol about the Sheriff. Sadly, they were too dumb to realize they were proving Dupnik's point about hatred and intolerance.

The local paper related comments that were posted on latimes.com, and washingtonpost.com: "So, Congresswoman Giffords, how's that Obamacare working out for you?" and "Too bad it wasn't Howard Dean or Al Gore." Sarah Palin, who targeted democrats on her website, including gunscope crosshairs on Giffords' district, now claims those weren't gun crosshairs but those of a surveyor's scope. And Glenn Beck posted a statement on his website that he's against violence, next to a photo of him holding a gun. These people are out of touch and delusional.

If there will be any good that comes out of this tragedy, it will be that people and politicians will learn to turn down the level of vitriol and viciousness and political jingoism. After all, it could just as easily have been a republican who was shot. It's time to turn down the volume and look at the things we have in common, even when our political views differ. It's about respecting our differences the way you would want other people to respect your differences.

Turn down the volume folks. Listen with respect. Seek to understand rather than to persuade.